"newsmakers." >> we join our guests after having just spoken to ed markey. we heard of his handicapping the politics, what are yours the? >> to me, the question is, will anyone pay the political price for having stood in the wake of the climate legislation? this year many are wary of taking it up. it went nowhere. if no one punishes them for that, and there is no cost in terms of the votes -- i don't see the dynamics of the bill changing much. the other side has a lot of money, the one against the climate bill passing. i do not see the political hammer behind the issue to punish them for not acting.

>> even separate legislation that passed the house that would just addressed the oil spill seems to be going nowhere in the senate, and is tied at an election year politics. no one wants to do anything before november. no wonderoil spilling, there is question. initially there was a great deal of agreement between both parties that something needed to be done. that this oil spill had highlighted some problems with how we regulate offshore drilling. that is falling away now. >> i have read both the american petroleum institute and environmental groups are going around town hall meetings. how much interest do you think the public will have in this 's campaign?ais

>> is hard to say. the environmentalists want to resurrect the momentum from last year. the institute wants to put the final nails in the coffin for the bill, are least take it down. >> there was a similar dynamic last year. i went to a couple of these in the west. there were some town hall meetings. there would be huge rallies with a band and speaker by the other side. it seemed then there was a real imbalance in terms of political momentum between the environmentalists and the energy industry. the congress did not act.

now the environmentalists are having to play defense. what they have left is the obama administration ability to regulate greenhouse gases. many companies want to take that away. >> closing with bp, congressman ed markey said he wanted to see bp stand for bills paid. how much authority does congress have? what tools to they have to ensure that the people who may have claims on the money get it is? >> there is a lot of statutory authority enforcement against bp to pay for the cleanup itself. there is an unclear issue concerning the liability, at $75 million.

it is a crucial point in the legislation. it is stalled now. both bills would eliminate the cap. that is why the obama administration stepped in and made them do that. the administration has exacted a promise that bp will do it beyond the $20 million. they will have to hold them to the promise. if these bills make it through this year or in the next congress, they would lift the cap retroactively. >> you have someone very skilled in dealing with the compensation issue. you will see many people from the gulf coast, a particular class of people -- it will not be without controversy. the kenneth feinberg process is supposed to debt and that, as will time. >> thank you for your questions.

please come back. >> coming up, a look at the future of iraq with the outgoing ambassador, christopher held. also, a couple of town hall meetings with members of congress. -- christopher hill, outgoing ambassador to iraq. >> the bureau of ocean and energy management and the coast guard will hear from key executives of the companies involved. live coverage from houston, texas begins monday at 9:00 and eastern on c-span2. >> one of the things i regretted about political and rhetorical life in washington is that every

major figure from the president down is merely reading what someone else in some committee has produced. >> terzian wrote speeches for carter. he is literary editor @ "the weekly standard." listen to him tonight on c-span. >> christopher hill recently returned after his 16-month stint in iraq. next, his comments. this is one hour and half. >> good morning, and thank you

for coming out. we are pleased to welcome back christopher hill. he has just completed an effective tore in baghdad. the ambassador has had a long career, beginning with the peace corps in cameroon. he has been in korea, macedonia, among other places. he has been the leader of the six party talks in north korea, assistant secretary of state. the next chapter will have him be the dean of international studies at the university of denver.

he will soon go back to rhode island. it is the home of the best ice cream parlor in the country. you should visit it. so, another red sox fan here. we're very pleased to have embassador hill. some lessons learned, but visions of where we are going with this relationship between the u.s. and iraq. there are people in baghdad and beirut who are watching us online. we may get some questions from them as well, and from this group, and from the overflow audience in a nearby room. please welcome ambassador hill.

[applause] elcome ambassador hill. [applause] >> thank you very much, bill, and for inviting me to this old building. i know that you are all looking forward to this building which is larger than the largerastrodome. it is under budget, write the? >> absolutely. >> so, i am leaving the state department, not only because our view of the potomac has been obstructed -- [laughter] i have always liked the views of the u.s.i.p. it is a great pleasure to be back here. i have wound up 16 months in

iraq. as they say in the world cup, i went into extra time there. i was planning to make it 12 months, but i did try, want to see if i could be helpful on the issue of government formation which is a bit of a labor of love. from day to day it is a very painful process. it will get done. let me just say, for those who have served there, there is no more searing time in one's life than to work in baghdad or on a provincial reconstruction team. ambassador jim jeffries is arriving as we speak.

the foreign service has embraced the monumental challenge of this transition, but also the transition of iraq were broadly, and of the u.s. relationship to iraq. i'm proud of all the foreign service officers who have gone. people do not bring their families. instead of living with your wife and children, you live with a roommate. you have it filled the form to make sure that the roommate does not drink, smoke, or put to bed too late, or wake up too early. it is quite an expense. you also experienced the thrill of getting a duck and cover al arm. we have come off of several weeks in which we had rocket fire nearly every day on the green zone. the new people leap out of bed and hide under them. the old people keep going.

if you're there for only a couple more days, you also begin to leave from your bed, and jump into your bed. it has been an experience to live there, to be sure. i really do believe if you look at where we have been there, and where we're going, that is definitely going in the right direction. i arrived in april. i arrived at a 30 p.m., presented my credentials to the foreign minister -- at a 30 p.m., and at about 11:00 p.m. i presented them to the president. at midnight i sat down to a banquet of kurdish food, which included a serving of turkey. at about 1:30 a.m. i return to my home. -- it all began at 8:30 a.m., then i had leon panetta to

breakfast, and secretary clinton arrived. when secretary clinton left at around 8:00 p.m. on a saturday night, as it was glad it was sunday -- and she said no, that is the first day of the work week around here. when you get there it grabs you by the throat. it is an extremely energetic, very busy place. you throw yourself into things. i'm proud of americans who come there, and continue to go there, to make it all work. in iraq it is one series of problems after the next. when i got there we were dealing with the fact that we had our u.s. troops numbering about 140,000. we were beginning the process of relocating them from cities and

towns into the countryside. and for turning over responsibilities to the iraqi army. there was concern at the time as to whether the iraqi army could manage the process. soon after the completion there were a number of high-profile bombings. that is an awful way to put it, but basically, they took down a foreign ministry and finance ministry in a single day in august 2009. there were additional bombings in the months after that. yet the iraqi army stood up. if you go back to google those bombings in october, november, read the main street media, you see many arguments that somehow iraq will not survive these bombings.

but these would imperil everything we were doing. but look at iraq today, and it is still moving forward. there is a resiliency in any society that is difficult to predict. but there's a particular resiliency there that people need to understand is there. as i left last week a check on the number of u.s. troops. when i arrived it was over 140,000. when i was leaving it was around 55,000. and it was on a glide path to make the 55,000 level by the end of august. the u.s. troops have already switched their mission to moving from combat operations to advise and assist brigades. brigades, assisting the iraqi military -- that has been the mission for several

months. it had been implemented in the south and going to the rest of the country. it is not like anything big will happen on the 31st. on the 31st of august, it will look le that 30 of august. but almost in most places like the 31st of july and the 31st of june. i would say that the securities such operation which is very difficult, one that is not going to be at a completely satisfactory level -- but it will continue to improve. the iraqi fces are capable of handling the security problems. they will have problems. there will be mistakes. we will make mistakes in how we handle it. they will learn from their mistakes as we arn from ours. i think you will see continued improvement in the security situation. i think similarlye are in the midst of a very difficult

process of government formation. this is a process that if you have the stomach to follow every day, letter its impact of this small -- you had better get some pepto-bismol. you thought people would be in one position on tuesday a they are in another place on thursday. it is hard to follow and sometimes hard to stomach. but one has to step back from that knowledge in and look at the overall situation of where iraq is and where iraq will go. with respect to the government formation, as difficult as the process and he did as the processes, i recommend not trying to follow it from the press because you will find it even more heated through that

medium -- you will see that at some point, like every country, iraq will have a government. the real question for us is not whether they are going to have a government -- they will. the question is -- hallett is the united states going to interact with this country? can we say that we're going have to long term special relationship that we have been talking about for many years? a couple popsicle i was privileged to go to the korean embassy and meet with people who were the first educational exchange people with what later became the fulbright program in the 1960's. i ask one of them, what was the biggest task for you to come to america in the 1950's? one of them said to me, it was to convince americans that korea is not a war. korea is a country.

about a month ago, i had the occasion to meet with the iraqi fulbrighters, and i tell them that one of your big tasks would the same, albeit struggling country with many problems, but a country that is very much in the middle east and will at some point us in its role and responsibilities commensurate with that side -- its size and very dynamic population. it is today a country under majority rule -- shi'a who are the majority there among the sunnis and the kurds, they have the prime ministership, and it is hard to predict who will have the prime ministership in the future. but most iraqis expect to see that the prime minister of iraq, the next prime minister will be

a shi'a. many americans look at this and say, does this mean that somehow sectarianism has prevailed in iraq andhat your identity as this go forward is somehow a setback -- as a shi'a is somehow a setback from the suttles decided that one was to create? i would argue that the civil society in iraq is growing. the tendency is to have more secular than sectarian tendencies. but the political identity will be an identity based in the time being on sunday, shi'a, and curtis affiliation -- sending -- sunni, shiite, and kurdish affiliation. when people look at the united

states and save police states and read states and regional identities, i think you can argue that politics is going to be based on some kind of identity, and as long as she got, sunni, and kurds know how to work together and they can reach across the identity divide and cooperate, that this is not something that we need to fear. and when you look at the politics in iraq,ou see shi'a having differences with other shi'a, you certainly see senator having differences with other senator -- sun having differences with other sunni, and the overall structure is not to be. baez. i think that we can work with the overall structure in iraq. when the government is finally formed, when iraqiya prevails,

whether the state of law, or some amalgamation of other groups, but when it emerges, if you will see that the kurds will have an important role in the baghdad government. you will see that the city's -- sunnis have an important role and the shi'a have an inborn a row. no one is suggesting that somehow if you can run at iraq -- that you can run iraq except through the three components. i think that that will get done. from the point of view of the united states, is this country going to embrace the democratic principles we need them to embrace? even though this political process set in very difficult, if you look at what happens in iraq in terms of the free press and freedom of speech, there is

a lot that people have absorbed the concept of these individual rights. caer's human rights abuses in iraq? of course, like any country, but the question is not whether there are abuses but what is the trend line? is it getting better or worse? most observers would argue that despite the horrific violence which unnerved many people, overall the trend lines in iraq for human rights are improving. what is iraq trying to do with its neighbors? is iraq trying to be a stable and good neighbor in the region? there again, you could look at this equation and take some sense of optimism from the fact that iraq has rked very hard to tamp down regional problems. there places where iraq needs to do more, b it does not mean that iraq is setting itself up in any kind of historical

adversarial role with its neighbors. in fact, it is looking for ways that it can work better with those neighbors. i think all of the ingredients would argue for the fact that the united states can have a longer-term and a special relationshipith this country. it is a relationship that is going to depend on our people's willingness to see iraq more -- not as a war. it depends on our willingness to work and to stay the course in iraq. obviously we are facing many budgetary issues today. it is not easy at all, but when you look at the overall national security costs of our staying in iraq, every time a stryker brigade leaves iraq versus standing up another rule of law module, something like that, the overall national security cost

for the united states are falling dramatically. even though the civilian component is comingp and the military component is going down. this is not some never-ending obligation. rather, we can see that overall the allies for this country -- our outlays for this country are falling and it will take a few years, to be sure, but we can look forward to the days to win iraq will be self sustaining, will be able to pay its bills, and whether it is eight years or 10 years, it will be in a position to pay all this bills and be a substantial economic player. when i got there in september -- april, there was a lot of talk about the hydrocarbon law. we made that judgment at the embassy, we said to ourselves,

what is the purpose of the hydrocarbon law? it is necessary for foreign investment. i think what we determined and i think the iraqi government is determining this, if we want foreign investment, why don't we get foreign investment? we went ahead with some oil contracts, production contracts and oil service contracts with major oil companies, and by that time this process was done by november 2009, iraq h now contracted with 11 major companies representing all of the major oil companies in the world. well companies from china, russia, the u.s., britain, france -- all of the countries of the un security council, but many others as well. if all of these cringe -- all of

these contracts are realized, or ron will be producing oil in the neighborhood of what saudi arabia produces. in other words, it is going to be a major player in the oil market, a year with its own oil. this was never about the u.s. taking its oil. the u.s. share of these contracts are fairly small. we had a big one, but only two of the major oil companies are actually u.s. iraq will be a major player. it will be economically successful, it is a matter of time. you can see the economy growing day by day. you can see a nascent development of basrah, you can e the developments in kurdistan. once i went up to see a shopping mall there which had a food

store on the ground floor, and on the third floor there was a bowling alley, believe that are not. things are happening in iraq. they are -- there are continuing pockets of very difcult security issues, mosul is one. if you talk to the security of there, you'll hear that it was never handled properly. there were always issues up there. but the iraqis know what those issues a and they e managing security and i think that you will see that in these remaining areas for security has been a problem, you will see it continuing to turn in the right direction. the u.s. is looking forward to this relationship with iraq. it will be based on these economic relationships, and it was quite gratifying to be hosting in iraq some 22 u.s. agculture firms that were there. there will be another major

trade mission this fall. these are firms that are in the infrastructu and telecommunications. not necessarily an oil, so you'll see some diversification in iraq. i think we have stood up the largest academic exchange program in the middle east. the government has been very committed to it, and when you look at the amount of bonds that the iraqi goverent has put out -- the amount of funds that the iraqi government has put out for outgoing students, it is the highest in that region with a bilateral program with us. i think that we look to develop across a range ocultural activities. we work with their sporting teams, and we havlooked to make sure that we have a

balanced and full relationship with iraq. i think the iraqis want to make sure that we care about iraq, and not just as an element of the war against terrorism, but as a relationship with the country and its people. and i think we're on the way to doing that. a vernment. i am not going to predict when. i can predict that it will be difficult and painful, but we will get a government there, an i think the u.s. and look forward to a very important relationship with this country up 30 million people. i think it is a country that will be, because of its mix of , and occurred -- kurd, if you look at where it lies, next to ron on the one side and gnomon on the other

side. turkey and saudi arabia, therefore if you see the importance for u.s. policies. i think there will be a lot for our diplomats to do their, and i want to stress as the u.s. military draws down, the u.s. interests in iraq remain. we have very much interest in their sucss a thanks to their own efforts in terms of these zero contracts, it is not just the u.s. but other countries that have a great interest in iraq posset says. one of the things that we will have to do when there's a new government is try to go out to the regions and make sure that iraq has as good relationship with the region as it can. it has to overcome terrorism and be able to come over dictatorship and a sense of

being estranged from his neighbors and from the region. i return from iraq from reels -- which they sit -- with a real sense of optimism about its future. if you do get enmeshed in the day-to-day events, but when you step away from that, if you can set the progress. we have gone from 140,000 down to 50,000 troops in just the 16 months that i was there. we have gone to a situation where their local governments is very much engaged in the process of in getting -- of getting investors in. we have many relationships with their universities, banks to the security situation. i've been able to trave outside of baghdad into all the provinces of iraq. i am sure my successor will be able to do the same. i think when we look at where this place is began -- where

this place has been and where it is today, i think you can see it as the future. how about some questions? >> thank y very much for that overview. a reew of what has happened during a piod there and your expectations about the future. let me on it to a question. we' very pleased that the iraqi ambassador to the united ates is here with us. welcome back, sir. if you like to ask any questions, you have the first opportunity, but i will look for your hand. and the first question is in the back here, sir. there is a microphone coming to you. >> good morning. my question to you -- where does national reconciliation ay in the priories iraq?

you mentioned the hydrocarbon law has just contractual think, while it is really very deep. >> i think the effort at getting this on to the framework was actually one that was impeding the actual purpose of the framework of law. he points out that the point was national reconciliation, but the other purpose was attracting foreign investment and getting it moving. it did not seem like the right approach. now the foreign investments are there, and the need for this framework law is clear. they need to do something about the institutional at the structure toward dealing with oil. it is also -- moving on the contracts also has the effect of

getting the problems of coracts, those of also moved in there has been agreement on those issues as well. i think the result of just getting the process moving has resulted in some success in terms of, first of all, investment and national reconciliation. i think after reconciliation needs to blooked at more broadly than just the hydrocarbon law. they are a variety of issues, including territorial issues, on the edge of the krg, the so- called disputed internal boundaries. this is something the u.s. and has been working in the u.s. military has started to facilitate per confidence- building measures, including joint patrolling and checkpoints. these have been very good

initiatives, but frankly much more needs to be done. not only in terms of confidence- building measures, b including trying to address the governance issues in these disputed territories. i think that is something the u.s. can do. in fact, the u.s. can be helpful in doing, and the un needs to be engaged in this, and they are. i would see the u.s. continuing tongage. we will have a person doing the northern issues who will be engaged very much. he is sitting in the room, george, great to see. we've got to get you to iraq. what you doing here? [laughter] i think we will continue to be engaged on that. when you look at some of the anbar they are

unni.hi'a-sendi if you look at some of the problems down in karbala, they were shi'a-shi'a. against makingn the national reconciliation is a sunni-shi'a issue, for a shi'a- curd issue. the need to strengthen their independent judiciary and strengthened the ability of a service-providing institutions, because at the end of the day, what the iraqi state from their government is not -- need from their government is not sectarian cheerleading, but the provision of more services.

i would like to think that some of the pressure to get on with government formation is coming from the public that is demanding that they get on but the process of providing more services to the people. electricity production is still woefully low. they continue to have water issues. investments in these areas need to be made, and the trouble with these issues is you invest one year, and it will not be for a couple of years until you see the return of your investment. >> bank. we have a very wet terrain the came here with, as marines did, with no umbrella. >> thank you, ambassador taylor. it is a long time since we work together.

-- i spent four years altogether in iraq. my question is a little bit complex and may touch upon some things that most of the people do not know about, so forgive me. just give me 20 seconds of back room. it strikes me that the problems we're seeing in the formation of the central government stem fro the fact that constitutionally the constitution of iraq is designed to serve on monolithic totalitarian regime we have ministerial control and budgetary a party. -- budgetary authority they administer the budget right down. there'd been some effort to overcome that with regionalization. the tension at the center stems from the fact that even though

the provinces and the regional governments are fairly stable, politically stable, the center is struggling over those mistries -- who is going to control the money, including the hydrocarbon sales? so with that fundamental tension between political stabilization at the sub- provincial level and the struggle for power at the cenr we see playing out, at the uc them overcome in that? the eupepsia resolution of that any time in the near future -- do you see any resolution of that any time in the near future? we saw a breakdown between allawi and others. this seems to me to be a big part of the reconciliation, and the stuff that goes on what bombs going on, that can be overcome eventually. but that tension at the center does not look like to me it is going to resolve itself very

easily without modification of the constitution. can you comment? >> i think they can achieve a new government without modifying the constitution. one of the issues that has come up is the question of whether the constitution, which inventions of council of ministers, whether there is too much authority that has gravitated to the prime ministership instead of the council. their situations where some security structures that should be on the the ministry of inrior moved to the prime minister. now what you are nuri al-maliki , you would say that you do not want security structures under me. but we were facing a life and death insurgency and we had to move fast and deal with a tough situation. but i want them back in the ministries where they belong. and what i also want, if you are

nuri al-maliki, i want to say that not only is power redistributed, but responsility redistributive. what he does not want is a situation where you create a power-sharing government and then people from another party say, well, that is up to the shi'a, they are in charge of this. froms to say, if you're iraqiya, you'reoing to have ministry x, and you need to take ownership and responsibility for these issues. part of that is the responsibility sharing and i think maliki has a plan for that. i would disagree with your notion of the constitution being a totalitarian concept. but that many countries in the world. there is a central issue that everyone deals with, the power

of the center versus pyrites of the regions. in the country -- rights of the region. even in our own, you have this problem. key issue is to find a balance. certainly in iraq's case, but there were ccerns that the draft would be toward too many powers in the region's and this would weaken the center and create a situation where the cohesion of the country might suffer. ey tried to deal with that in the constitution and make sure that there was a strong center. when you look at the kind of issues that need to be addressed in iraq, the investment laws and the various problems of services and things like that, a case can be made for needing a strong center that can do this. but when you look at the issues

-- you alluded to, and anytime you visit a place where people will say, we do not have -- our provincial councils are not properly funded. the money is in baghdad and you have to go to the ministry, and once you're there you will not get the services. it is a problem and something needs to be corrected. but the provincial powers laws can address some of these things. i do not suggest that there needs to be a new constitution. but like any country under a new constitutional order, they had to strike the balance, and it is not easy to do in any country, and it is especially difficult to do in iraq were there were centrifugal forces at work seeking to pull the place apart. when we look at some of the things that need to be done in

the context of government formation, we felt that a lot of the things that could be done did not involve constitutional changes. i think there are a lot of things that could be done by statute. one of the problems with this long period of government formation, technically the council -- the council of representatives is in session but it is really not. no one is proposing new laws, no one is moving ahead. that is another reason to get moving on this process. >> i'm going to recognize right here, but maybe you could follow on ts issue? the issue of distributing powers within the center. there have been proposals recently about a new political committee for national security or what they call the national council for strategic parts that would establish a fourth center of power.

each group would have one of the minister's. and this would be at fourth. what is the current thinking on that? >> that is different from the issue a region versus center. but when you look at -- you have the main political groupings, you have a concern about how power has evolved under nuri al- maliki, a lot of power coming to the prime minister in your major concern that the prime minister position is a looming large. and then you look at some of the other elements of the system, including the political committee for national security, where you have the prime minister convening a meeting that looks like the pridency. and leaders of the parliamentary

blocs, there is a moribund that has not been called on a regular basis. you start looking at the question -- could that element be strengthened? and strengthened in a way that you preserve the prime minister as commander-in-chief, but strengthen the ability of the broader government to be providing policy guidance. i think a number of people have looked at this with the understanding that you do not want to go into a new constitutional arrangement. i think that feeling is that you could create a suit up -- souped -up political committee, and put it in statute, where it was done through an agreement with people

but not through a statute. if you look at what that they have got the right national security structure for what they are dealing with, i would argue that they could make some imprement there, but i will argue that tested the united states in 1947 put together the national security act without changing one word of the constitution, you can do something like that in iraq. but there is a mountain of mistrust to deal with. there is a zero some notion -- sum notion, that if you do x, you must sehow be weakening y. when-when is considered -- win- win, they do not quite get. -- get it.

[inaudible] he said that it they get to the playoffs, he will be back in. he may be on crutches. >> associated press. you talk about security problems. it is the situation -- do you have concerns that that might be one way that iraq might turn? >> am i concerned about how they might turn? >> is there the danger of a coup in iraq? >> i don't think the issue of a coup is an issue that comes up or is on the table. i do not think that there is any scenario -- any realistic scenario that would involve that sort of problem. the kind of problem that they have it is continued terrorist attacks. i do not believe that

terrorists are using car bombs in killing wen and children because they're dissatisfied with the flow of government formation. i do believe that iraqis have an expectation that they will have a government. frankly, it is the kind of place where they expect a strongish govnment. the longer that this goes on, the more people ask the question whether it is affecting the security situation out on the streets. i must say, the police are working very hard. the army is working very hard. our forces are working very hard with the iraqi forces. i cannot personally. two examples whe government formation is impeding the law- and-order efforts. but certainly one was to seek government formation sooner rather than later, and security is one such region -- reason.

>> we have a question from an iraqi in baghdad to ask this question on government formation. what happens if no government is formed soon? will the united states intervene? >> thad allen have asked -- what does she mean intervene? u.s. embassy, i can tell you, has been working daily on this issue. there have been days when the political counselor there, gary who left just a week ago, he would have upwards of 10 meetings a day with every single iraqi political party or political coalition. i myself would frequently have meetings with all the leaders. almost on a daily basis.

some people would call it intervention, i would call it being helpful. it is not in our interest to be pushing ourselves on people who do not want to assemble. -- want us to be involved. i thinke need to be respectful of their sovereignty. if you look at air ron's efforts in iraq, they have not done very well because they have not observed the first rule which is to be respectful of the country's sovereignty. i think we are respectful and as such i think we are listen to. but we need to be very careful here. there are a lot of minefields in that country, literally and figuratively, and we do not want to put ourselves into the position where we appear t be somehow taking sides in a way that will not be understood by the iraqi public.

to the questionnairei will tell her that there will be a government. i cannot think of too many places, maybe somalia is an example, but not too many places where there have not been a government so there will be a government. and it will incde all three components, the question is, it can do what -- who can do what? >> i am with the american kurdish affirmation that work. -- information network. the bible is not included there and sometimes it should be. some things say that tripod should be set next to an iron kettles. -- should not be set next to

iron kettle. [unintelligible] do you think the arab population is going to be respectful ofhe 20% of kurds without a balance of power? >> i lost you on the clay pot. [laughter] kurds and arabs have been neighbors for centuries. i think the kurds have achieved of broad autonomy in the republic of iraq. and moreover, the kurds had been part of the solution rather than the problem. i think the fact that president barzani is one of the most respected politicians in iraq, and the fact that all the political leaders in baghdad, whether allawi or maliki, all of

them hav been able to discuss the issues. i would say the kurdish -- the krg, the kurdish regional government, plays an important and positive role. i think they have the autonomy which has enabled them to create a region, that i think meets the aspirations of its >> to be able to live their lives free of oppression. when you traveled with the president and -- we were going over to many countries. he points out these sites where they met with the iraq the army

over this difficult dictates. he can see the krg is in a much better place and it has not even moved. when you look at the investments and the mall -- you should se the university there or the investments going on. the krg is done well. how do we address the issue of the internal about boundaries? these are overlapping claims. one sign does not -- it is hard to deal with the other side's clai. we need a long-term process. i think the people need to believe the rest of iraq is

increasing democratic principles. when you look at the history we are talking more about hope than history. what i do know is they krg leadership understands these issues very well and is a force for progress. we will continue to work with a krg. the u.s. has a special relationship with the kurdish people, but we have made it clear we see they krg as part of iraq. >> we had two related questions.

they are both on line. do think they should intervene and support partitioning iraq into ethnocentric regions or under one government? jaye says the same question. is there a solution or option? >> the letter was from beirut and the earlier was from an iraqi citizen. >> i lov beirut, but the rest of the world cannot be like lebron -- like lebanon not all of their political solutions can be replicated. first of all, the notion of

partition has been raised. i don't think any person can support that. it would involve horrendous sacrifice. think any serious pson is talking about that. i try to address the identity politics. i think those identities will evolve over time. we may have people who gain a greater sense of identity as a southerner as opposed to a portia -- as opposed to a shiite. people having a concept of being iraq key is also strong.

people can have more than one identity. you see many hyphenated americans. they have one identity sunday afternoon and the rest of that is they are american. that kind ofhing can be managed. this government formation has taken a long time. i think the dutch still have the record on that. it is painful, but people don't need to start pulling out that the ideas. >> yes, sir. >> my name isesse bernstein. i was pleased to hear your

comments about [unintelligible] all lot of us were concerned about displacement of forced christians. i wonder if you could talk about protection of relious minorities. i met with many refugees and they said they would never want to return. my second question is about u.s. affiliated iraq is. iraqis. affiliated i i wonder if you could talk about the steps u.s. is taking to improve processing. >> on the issue of e christian minorities, i had regular meetings with leaders of this christian minorities and i have

been out to some of these towns, including to see a monastery. these are ancient communities. the assyrians, for example. it has been difficult for christians during this time in iraq history. many were accused of somehow .upporti saddam hussein' when you talk to the leaders of these communities, one of the things they are concerned about is western countries have made room for iraq christian refugees, meaning they christian populations continue to be

decimated by people trying to help. one of this christian leaders told me you should refuse visas for them. even the days a perfectly legitimate programs. we will not refuse visas for those with eligibility. these are tough issues to mage. we have worked in the area to make sure you get local peace -- police will reflect local conditions. we are doing ok on that. when churches have been attacked reworked th the iraqi government. they have reacted well and in

terms of providing protection. these problems are not government-inspired. they come from other elements of the society. it has to do with the we need to stay engaged on this issues. i know ryan crocker did those sorts of things where you meet with the command of a to be helpful to -- meet with the community. i know we have backlogs. i have not heard it is a year. if you talk to people and refugee affairs they will say it is less. where't want a situation

the affiliation with the americans -- we want to see examples where people are being threated for affiliations. we monitor these questions and there are many examples where people have been treated poorly. >> there is a related question. what steps is the government taking to ensure iraqi police have been trained? >> w have a robust tining program. that is something we spent a lot of time to make sure civilians continues this training program.

it is not just training police on the beat, but forensics. police traing is one of the major elements of the training transition. >> [inaudible] >> you mentied that several times the need to convince amican people iraq is a country and not a war. how concerned are you that people will not be willing to provide resources for a small scale going forward? this was an unpopular war. >> we work a lot with

congressional staff with congressional members. iraq was a difficult seven years. it was quite emotional when you look at thousands of americans killed and the concern the objectives has changed. that is why we went in there. you have to respect the person on the oer side of the issue. you cannot just dismiss concerns as coming from those who are uninformed. we have gotten to the point where our programs are slimming down.

even though there are different committees doing this, so the state department made think the numbers are going up, but if they look at what the hit is, the numbers are coming down. we live in an era where we aren't doing this civilian ops, and i is time people took a holistic view of how to measure our engagement. if you consider it military operations and a civilian operations as apples and oranges, that is not the right way to look at it. i think the military has done a

fabulous job of police tining, but that has to be done by civilians. want this situation where we have to keep tasks on the military side. the military has a couple of major deployments. we have about 178 other deployment. jusall go to iraq and afghanistan we have major relationships. even the embassy. smith is a major relationship we have there. -- even the embassy paris. we need a first rate embassy in

paris. we have to balance these. it is not easy but we have talented people working with the congress, so i think we will figure it out because it makes sense. >> staying on the topic of the transition, we have a question asline on the use of prt's they draw down continues. there has been the auction for five embassy branch offices and there may be four. if you could tell us more about that? >> i thought this issue was very

hush hush, but here we are discussing it. to manage your relationship and iraq, you cannot just do it from one place in baghdad. in an ideal world he would like to in many areas. when youtart costing these things out, there are not cheap. the issue is when you look at life sustainment. if you look at transport issues, it is not easy to put people back there.

paulison this is the time after the agreement expires. there cannot be any u.s. forces unless they are an illegal agreement. you have to assume there will not be u.s. troops. to take a provincial reconstruction team out of the military could can and try to -- out of the military cocoon. some of our people are transported courtesy of the military. do you want to have -- you don't really need them?

you have to make some assumptions about what the security situations. you have to start -- before you know it you are into some big numbers. it is a lot of these things -- you have work out what is the most crucial? can you handle issues through a more robt travel plan from the embassy? where do you need people stationed all year long? you come up with -- i bet the usip building was twice as large as the one finally built.

what i can tell you is what ever finall emerges in our footprint -- we have informed e iraq a government on this. i can assure you we will have a footprint where we will have the right people in the right place. it will be commensurate and consistent with our country's objectives. >> there are some in iraq when they look at their htory of conflict when it comes to cultural, wonder if the current system of government will work.

they fear that the government may be weak and unstable. are these fears justified? at can be done to ensure it this is effective? >> iraqis are used to strong government, but fear it as well. the alternative is strong government is weak government. i am convinced that democracy is the best form of government cause it is difficult but better than the others. i don't see any other model for iraq. if did that this is difficult, let's go back to mass murder --

it is tough to keep that a little. the notion you can go to some other model and said it will be authoritarian some -- i think they have the right system. the issue is to try to make it work. obviously it will be difficult, i am sure people will look back at this time and there will be lessons learned. i don't panic about this. people need to stay calm and it is hard to do when its 120 degrees out. we just have to get through this.

as for what iraq had in the past, if you look at their past there is not a lot of inspiration for good governance. >> [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] whoever becomes the next prime minister in iraq will ensure [inaudible] [inaudible]

[inaudible] [unintelligible] thank you. >> iran, did you said? it is not up to us and it is not up to iran. it is up to the iraqews how long they want mr. maliki tuesday. the other question is interesting because it goes to the question of term limits. we have had this issue come up about term limits.

he worried about issues like corruption, so should you have term limits? a lot of countries have term limits. we did not have them until after world war ii. it would not surprise me if the iraq people had a debate. because of this feared that you mentioned. it in hell governance is done in the region. sure that is necessarily good for any country. what did you do? people need to look at it.

running iraq is not for amateurs. it is a complicated matter, so you cannot just say y will have six months and as you . you need some more professionalism. the concern that the government stay is something the iraqi people ought to have a discussion about. i say this to the point where i believe myself, but iraq is unique and itsroblems are not unique. this nion that iraq discovered term limits and no one has contemplated that is wrong. there are a lot of problems all over the world in the iraq can learn from how other countries

have dealt with it. i note it is obvious, but it needs to be restated. >> there are representatives from embassies here and overseas questions. it relates to the iran issue. does the lack of respect for iraqi sovereignty posed a threat to a newly formed government? >> lack of respect for iraq's sovereignty? does that pose a threat to a newly formed government? the latest one -- how do you do coordination among allies?

this talks about engagement and the next phase. [unintelligible] is the u.s. working with other countries to making sure [unintelligible] >> on iran, there is more talk about this in washington than baghdad. iraq is -- i don't care whoou are, you don't plan to sell your country. i heard a lot of people described as pro-iran and. i really think tre is a lot of exaggeration in the degree to which there are iraq is looking to sell the country's interest.

what is not exaggerated is the degree to which i ran inside engaged in mischief and iraq and the fact that some of these extremist groups get equipment from iraq is a fact. a rocket that landed in my yard a few months ago --it had iran markings on it. if i were the iran hinske and i thought to mysf, what ever we do will not determine that country's fate. it will be determined by its own people. i would be looking to build a

good relationship overcoming one of the most horrific war is in the 20th century. i would do a much better job of looking at what my long-term interests are. iran cause long-term interests are not served by allowing rockets to come over the border. i think iranians have acted recklessly for these activities. when i look at their efforts to affect the political situation, they he not been very successful. iran made it clear they oppose open less.

iranians made clear they did not want to see opened lists. they wanted all shiites together to turn this has been to shi'a curses cine issue. -- vs sunni issue. there are statutes for [unintelligible] but the i iranians clearly engaged in trying to hit did not work -- it did n work. they have tried to put their weight behind various candidates. they have invited all the shia

parties and a kurdish party is to have a government in to run. when you look at how influential they are, i would be careful with the notion that they call the shots. even iraq says who want to have a good rationship with this neighbor -- i would be careful that those people are doing iran's workor them, they are not. i would take a deep breath and look at what my long-term interests are. >> [inaudible] his are really good ideas.

we have been pleased with the nato countries that have been interested to help the iraqi army. i want to emphasize terrorism and a dictatorship, we know about those. isolation has been a serious problem. polls have been there as part of it. we have seen meet danish involved, the french have been interested. i look to see more of this. what is most gratifying is to say iraq is more understood to be the important player that it

is. it is not just a u.s. issue. i went to the convocation of the swedish embassy attended by the swedish foreign minister. it was a pretty serious and to say. the swedes are talking about doing other things in northern iraq. the more european countries get involved, the better. >> [inaudible] >> yes. >> you gave us an optimistic

scario. >> here i always do. >> do you see on the horizon any [inaudible] >> [inaudible] the car or the president? [laughter] not to bring down the optimism, i would like to see more iraq is engaged in the political process. seven years into their democracy, one would have liked to have seen some new faces and yet there are not a lot of new faces.

i think it is important for young people to understand this is their country and they have a grt opportunity to build a new state. when i have gone to some universities i don't hear the iraqi kids talking about sunni or portia. most of them asked if their energy -- engineering degree would be good enough when exxon mobile comes? i hope that democracy will spawn an interestn political activity. it is encouraging the government went ahead with an ngo law.

in many of these democracies, -- protoplasm of democratic structures. in the middle east sometimes those have not than positive structures. with this law and i see it as very positive. i hope we will see these political parties get some fresh blood. maybe you will say some great leaders emerge. it is easy to be critical of the current crop of lears. you can't complain they spend too much time out of the country.

this is easy to criticize find a lot of these guys risk their lives they take a lot of criticism. it is not an easy job and somehow i do believe ty country is going in the right direction. we need to have the iraqis blazing the trail. it is easy to be critical, but we ought to cut them some slack and encourage a new generation of leaders. >> the last question will be

here. i have two online. >> i am a grad student at texas a&m university. my question is how about nato members in iraq. turkey is pursuing a more assertive foreign policy. what affect will this have on the development of a new government in iraq? >> turkey has a great interest in how iraq develops. they are inviting leaders and are engaged. from u.s. policy perspective, turkey is a positive influence. economicurkey's

investments and it is positive. i don't think more of a regional interest means less of a western aspiration. we are very much engaged with the turks on these issues. i know the secretary clinton talks to the [unintelligible] i talk to the turkish ambassador a lot. we have a good ally in iraq. they have a history there. is amazing when you talk about the turks and won some iraqis might be critical about what

they have done in terms of engagement with the parties. when you look at the history of the ottoman empire, you see the complexity. if it is always difficult. but we have a great relationship with turkey. >> at the beginning of the occupation, one of a primary focus this was to remake the economy into a free market. what will be its legacy? >> i would not call iraq a cialist economy. in some respects it is a race between dissipation and rise of

the private sector. i think the private sector is winning. it is going in the right direction. you stub your toe a lot on it. i avoid wide sweeps of socialist versus capitalist. i would rather talk about the direction it's going. >> the last question is, what is the extent of the optimism for the deployment? is he more or less optimistic? >> first you get there and y

said this is not so bad, and then you get to know more people and you start understanding the dimensions of the problem and they go into a view nothing will get better. then you figure it out and sort out what the issues are verses what issues will take more time. then you finally leave and you look back and say, i think they will make it. it is usually because you cannot see the alternative to making it. iraq is in no danger of being a failed state.

they have been through the toughest time, so i have an optimistic sense they know what they need to do. i am not sure us telling them what they need to do will get them to do it. i think the iraqi people need to be consistent they get some things done. you are seeing some pressure building, but there was an interesting piece over the weekend about american clocks and a sometimes i don't understand the sff he writes. it will not be done in our time scdule.

it will never be when you want it. i made the point the other day, if this is instant gratification, you better look elsewhere. thank you very much. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] >> up next, a couple of town hall meetings with members of congress. ed royce and danny davis. after that, a look at the

economic impact of the recent flooding in pakistan. also, the recent technology conference at nasa with comments. >> next week we will show you the continuing investigation into the deepwater horizon incident, as the bureau and coast guard here from key personnel from bp, halliburton, and transition. all-day coverage from houston, texas begins on monday at 9:00 a.m. eastern on c-span2. >> the networks provide coverage of politics, american affairs, and history, all available online, television, radio, and on social-networking sites. find content through our library. we take coverage on the road. it is washington your way, the c-span that works.

available in more than 100 million homes. provided as a public service. >> now ed royce of california at a town hall meeting. he covers several subjects. following his remarks, he took questions from constituents. this is just over one hour. >> our congressman does a great job representing the 40th district, and we need to keep them there. when you look to the flag, remember all those in the military, past and present who have fought to preserve the freedom that we enjoy.

[pledge allegiance --pledge of allegiance] >> thank you. >> a couple of other dignitaries i should introduce, and the audience -- ed royce, sr., the mayor here --thank you. dick and norma jones, he is a councilman. [applause] i thought it would begin with a brief wrap up. we have a microphone here. we will try to keep questions

and answers short. let me begin by saying we are in a unique position in washington now. it is the first time in modern history that in the washington, d.c. we are operating without a budget. the speaker has deemed a budget will not be brought up this year. as a consequence, our appropriations process is moving at a very rapid pace. we have had a 12% increase in appropriations. most agencies and departments of governments are growing by that much per year. we had a similar increase last year. if we looked out over the last four years in terms of what has happened to government expenditures -- i remember four

years ago been concerned and speaking out about the $162 billion budget deficit. now that deficit is 10 times of that amount. it is between $1.50 trillion and $1.60 trillion. one of the reasons that it worries us in the federal reserve is we could lose weaaa rating of our treasuries. the sovereign debt issue could lead to a catastrophic outcome , catastrophicin greece. it is important in my opinion that the public began to speak out about it, and take action to bring it down -- it could lead to a catastrophic outcome, as in

the country agrees. another thing -- i do not think the actions in washington over the last few years have had the desired effect. i'm talking about the stimulus bill. most benefits increased government agencies, departments, employment. we have close to 500,000 more new employees in the government. we have had a 15% increase. in the private sector where economists argue that the real jobs are created, we have lost close to 3 million. rather than the government spending, which has mostly gone into the public sector -- rather than that jump starting the economy, the unemployment numbers are becoming worse. it is now 9.5%. for those of us with the

background in business, as has been mine, it in small business, before i became involved in politics -- first of a give my opinion, then we will hear from you. it seems to me with all the uncertainty out there, with small businesses now in a situation through they face a new assessment, a new task, as a result of the mandate -- the potential the legislation that passed through the house on the card check program or we will not have a secret ballot in the future -- but instead a small business owner of look at an increase in employment -- will you be worried about hiring new employees if it looks like the bill go from the senate? as a consequence of that

legislation, if you are hiring someone new, other than those you already know, and the national labor relations board will no longer have a secret ballot election, but you will have an election based on the card check, you will be resistant. 70% indicates that is a problem. for the first time, you see small and medium-sized businesses holding $2 trillion worth of cash on their balance sheet. economists call this hoarding. when i hear from business leaders that they face a situation where their concern about new energy taxes that may hike their bill by 30% -- the

bill is in the senate -- that level of concern, and over the issue of whether we will do something long term about bringing down the deficits, that level is compounding the problem. that is my overall concern. what do we get your questions? come to the microphone, state your name and question. i will be happy to respond. fullerton.bullet

the budget mess began last administration, not this administration. one of the biggest problems to the budget are the wars going on. it is destroying our economy. what is in congress, including you, get us out of iraq before the end of next year, get us out of afghanistan right now? and use the money to rebuild our country. >> in terms of iraq, we are on a glide path to bring our military out of iraq. we're trying to do it in a way where we stand up the iraqi military. the program we are on so far as pulling our troops out. that is the plan also for afghanistan. train the military so that they handle the problem with al qaeda.

in terms of the budgetary process, every spending bill under our constitution originates in the house. since the current speaker became speaker, for the last four years, the argument i made earlier, it is five years ago, i was concerned with the budget deficit at $162 billion. but during those four years we have seen this budget, the spending, go up to where the deficit is not 10 times what it was. my other concern is with the sheer growth of the size of government.

we will go now to the next question. >> thank you, congressman rooyce. as a small businessman, i think you can understand our concern over taxes and our concerns. liberal politics and liberal media have done a good job of demonizing the businesses and the rich. they have done this by consistently pounding home the message that every conference and press event that they have held -- they have done it this way. when will the conservative representatives stand up together and set the record right, and help to educate the masses? >> let me respond. what i have done to get the message shout besides being on

c-span, fox news, cnn, and on other programs, is to be on the radio stations, hold these forums. i'm not alone in doing this. this is the second forum i have held today. every chance that i get, i go out and try to dialogue with my constituency. i think what is necessary is we get people more involved in this issue. the only way that things will change -- if people feel the heat, they see the light. it is only by getting our citizens involved in the way that thomas jefferson originally envisioned where they began, not only to go to the polls, but to the town hall meetings, and

write representatives, that we will get the perspective outside a washington, d.c. we have plenty of people in government that we cannot talk to, but we need to get beyond that beltway, across america, and hear from constituents. that will have to change the direction. >> i'm probably one of the smallest businessmen in orange county. part of the problem is the cost of government. we see all government employees making about twice what the counterparts are in a civilian industry. we are in trouble. that has been a a growing

concern during several administrations. when will someone stepped up to a plate and say we will have a straight 10% cut across the board and celery for everybody? >> for those who supported a salary freeze, and i have never voted for increase in salary in the congress -- but for those of us to have argued for but only congress to have a freeze, but for the federal government to have a freeze, we have lost that vote. my wife says i should have been on the ballot as a short businessman, but i was a small businessman, and share your concern. besides the inequity in terms of pay, the attitude towards small- business -- in the healthcare

bill there is a new mandate that every time you have an expenditure of more than $600, you have to put out a 1099. can you imagine the cost to small business, difficulty, in terms of handling these? there are 19,000 new irs agents also funded through the bill, so maybe they can help, that the end of day there such a lack of balance. there is such a growth in the number of people and the public sector. a 15% increase over the last several years in the public employees. we need to find a balance. the way out of the economic recession is to encourage small business that hires 70% of our

work force. i think part of the answer is to recognize there should be according in a pay raise between the public and private sectors. other questions? >> i salute you for being here and listen to us ordinary americans. my concern -- i worked in a private college. i am at the chemistry and biomedical science teacher. i know that in the last election you took money from six banks as your primary donors, and then you voted to remove the reasonable regulations on the banking industry. >> you are technically wrong in this.

i was one of the voices to regulate the system. >> i'm talking about the legislation that just happened this summer. i believe that you voted against it. the previous the regulation that happened under the clinton administration and bush era led to the meltdown. >> let me give you my perception on that. first of all, in terms of the legislation just supported by the investment bank'ss, i don't think it is a good idea to pass legislation that guarantees a permanent backstop for the large investment banks. >> i totally agree with that. [inaudible]

>> i voted against every single bailout. >> you voted to deregulate the banks in the first place. >> i did not. i have the amendment on the house floor to try to regulate fannie mae. >> i'm not talking about fannie mae and freddie mac. do i have a free speech as a citizen? i only want to speak two minutes. it is my perception. maybe others also have this perception that the deregulation of the banking industry is what led to the financial meltdown and crash, and the loss of many small businesses. another thing is, when you voted for the bush tax cuts on the 2% of the richest americans, i think this is what led to the deficit in the bankruptcy of our

country. think about it. if you have less tax money coming in -- i have two minutes here. if you remove that much of the tax base, take away that much money from our country's treasury, then that creates a deficit. >> now i will respond. first of all, in terms of the questions of the regulation of the banks, there is phenomenal regulation over the banks. the question is the enforcement of that, and the question of whether or not you will create systemic risk. congress created systemic risk. i will tell you one of the ways they did it, and how it brought down the housing market.

the large investment banks took advantage of it, and so did aig. in 2004 the federal reserve said we face systemic risk. it is because of something congress has done. with the government-sponsored enterprises allowed them to go into arbitraged into leverage after 100-1. then to invest a very risky rates, in a portfolio of mortgage-backed securities. these enterprises were not doing more than securitized in loans. they were involved in arbitrage. the fed asked for the ability to regulate. this was an area in which

congress had tied their hands. congress had piled on by overpowering fannie and freddie to do zero-down payment loans. they have also forced them to do a program for affordable housing in which they bought subprime loans. that was 50% of their portfolio. that 50% was directly responsible for 85% of the losses when fannie and freddie collapsed. when you realize what happened next, a.i.g. had insured the mortgage-backed securities and a portfolio. when fannie and freddie, a.i.g. went down, then. some banks also began to go down. the reality jig then the

investment banks also began to go down. the reality is that the fannie and freddie-related banks went down. the argument is whether to pass legislation to bail them out. i was in favor of they're going through a process of bankruptcy, expedited. just as railroads and airlines go through. i'm not a fan of big banks, but the consequence of the they're not going through the process is that now a new bill comes forward. you and i agree on not voting for this legislation that just went out. the bill provides permanent bailout authority from the federal government for these large institutions, but only for them. you have to be systemically

significant. if you are a small committee bank competing with the big one, or cost of capital is now 100 basis points lower. it is a full point lower interest. you can now borrow because of the presumption that you will be billed out. the idea out there is, well, they got bailed out before. -- the presumption is that you will be bailed out. the big banks will give bigger. the small banks will be taken now by the big banks. i voted against that. lastly, it is my belief that if you keep taxes too high, you are not maximize revenue.

i think john kennedy was correct. there is a level of taxation in which assets go to highest and best use, the economy grows at a faster rate. it might seem counter-intuitive, but if you get that tax rates too high, it is a lug on the system. i support taxing individuals and business, but i think the rates can become too much when you add federal, state, and local tax rates together. but we may have a different -- >> i totally agree that this legislation that was passed that you voted against was not ideal, and it does have many giveaways to big banks and big business. talking about the economic crash really happening

by fannie and freddie which is what you are trying to divert it into. the fundamental issue is that the banks -- the goldman sachs are responsible. >> we agree on goldman sachs. we agree on that. let's leave it to the next person. there is more regulation on banks. the problem is effectively getting that regulation enforced. >> i am chris, a fellow writer. all to give you a sample letter that i wrote to mayor bloomberg. i would hope more americans would write to him regarding the cultural center mosque. >> i will only comment on that for a minute. abdul who's the head of the

culture center -- it is my understanding from what have seen -- from what i have seen in the newspapers that he has $18,000 in the account. i understand neutrality, but the state department has decided to send him on a tour to uae, bahrain, and another. my concern is this. if you or i wanted to put up an institution at ground zero, we would have to begin with more than $18,000 in the bank. if we did not have the money, we would not have the state department coming ford to send you on a trip to see if you can return with the $100 million it will cost to build a 14-story mega mosque on ground zero.

i don't think we have been even- handed in terms of how we have approached this. i am also concerned about his comments prior to press reports that he believes we were accessories to the fact of the 9/11 attack. that concerns me. i think his failure several months ago when asked about hamas and whether or not it is a terrorist organization -- his refusal to answer is a problem. i know some friends and the muslim community who have a great deal of concern about some of his other comments that have appeared in newspapers in jordan and in egypt and the past. i'm sitting down with them and going over some concerns of there's. just on the face of it, why does

the government say that we're not getting involved in zoning issue, and then post on the website for the state department the comments by the mayor of new york in defense of this action? that is getting involved in the zoning issue. secondly, why does the state department then underwrite a trip at a time when there's a shortage of funds? and historically, when have been these trips, part of the consequence is fund-raising. they say he is not just going for that purpose. i understand. but my question is, what is he going to be doing in the gulf state countries whose objective is to find mosques in the u.s.? these are concerns. >> i'm concerned about the hib

foreign worker program that allows our country to bring in hundreds of thousands of foreign workers that companies like microsoft -- bill gates claims he cannot find qualified americans to take computer and engineering jobs. my son just got a computer science degree and cannot find a job. why does bill gates lobbied congress every year and they raise the quota to allow more workers to come in? secondly, what does congress require these companies to submit proof that they could not find americans to take these jobs? number three, what follow-up is there once these foreign workers come here? i have read on the internet that no one tracks to make sure that they go home once they are here. what can we suspend the program when americans don't have jobs?

>> one observation i would make is in the past there has been a great deal of fraud in these programs. there have been stories on that in the major newspapers. so, absolutely, this needs to be audited more closely. second, we're in a time where we have unemployment of 14.5 million americans. so, i think you are right to be concerned about that. there is a wider concern i have in terms of the issue, of how we will handle illegal immigration. from what i have seen, the enforcement mechanisms suggested by the border patrol and by the deputy sheriffs are not been deployed, even though they have been enacted into law. for example, there was legislation twice on the border

fence. i co-sponsored it the first time because this was a request of the border patrol in terms of the san diego sector. they argued if they completed the fence across san diego, they could gain effective control over the border. it would allow them to be able to handle the crime in the area. they argued the cartels have gotten in control. when the border fence was completed, according to the statistics, the crime fell by half on both sides. that meant it was very effective. the border patrol then testified this was a very effective use of resources. it was a force multiplier for them. the second bill would continue and fund the border fence, the

double border fence. it is the way they liked it. and to run it up to the mountains. that was enacted into law. the foot-dragging on building it is really appalling. for a while we have the national guard working on this, but then the national guard was pulled off. we have not been able to get them to redeploy to assist. while there, they assisted and hundreds of thousands of apprehensions. the reason the issue is some gordon is because as a consequence of not having effective control, the cartel's do have effective control, especially the main parts of texas. i have had hearings in laredo

and on the california border. in both texas and arizona. the situation in phoenix has reached a point for that is the kidnapping capital of the u.s. you have several hundred people per year kidnapped in phoenix. it is a sanctuary city. you have a lawsuit by the police officers in the city against their government. they say their hands are tied in they cannot enforce the law. as a consequence, the police department argues that crime is getting out of control. the rest of the state reacted. the legislature passed legislation. it ended the sanctuary city

status for phoenix. suddenly, if you drive a car, to get a driver's license, you must be here illegally, either as a citizen to or a resident alien. as a consequence, they felt it would be axiomatic that if a law-enforcement officer stopped you what you are driving a car and you do not have a license, then there is a reasonable suspicion that it might be time to call immigration authorities to check the identity of the individual. it takes on added interest if you consider that on the day of 9/11, on the way to the airport speeding, two of the hijackers were stopped. they did not have a valid

identification. there was a list, watch list, and they were on it. if the phone call had been made to the 1-800 #by the police department, at that particular team would have been apprehended. at least that one attack would have been stopped. because of the action by that city council, there was no emphasis on doing that. as a consequence, when we have the 9/11 commission, it said the border security is national security. the first thing to do is to develop tamper-proof identification. arizona takes that action, and now they're being sued by the department of justice, the federal government. the theory being that it is illegal for arizona to enforce federal law when the executive

branch decides not to enforce what congress has passed. that will be an interesting case before the supreme court. thewhy can't we suspend >v visa program immediately surcease it is all dependent on laws in congress. believe it or not, change in these is a real lift. i was a co-sponsor of the border fence act. i thought once we have the signing ceremony, that job would get done. it is an education. next question, please. >> my name is andrew talbott and i lived in anaheim. my grandfather is 81 years old,

and has 16 years of retirement enjoyed already. john boehner recently said he was interested in exploring the possibility of raising the retirement age up to at least seven. as a deficit hawk, i wonder how you would want to raise the retirement age. it is the first year that social security will give out more than it takes in. >> are you for lowering the age? >> they, personally i would rather see an increase in the fica. >> you have many public employees retiring at 50 and 55. how do you feel about that? >> it is their privilege under the currently-run system that

they can take a reduced amount over a longer period of time. >> i understand, but in looking at the systems we have built. i want to see seniors get their retirement, ok? to do that, i think we will probably end up with a commission that will study the issue and try to figure out a resolution. a just solution. i will wait to see what the commissioned of those. the idea of the socialization agreement with mexico on social security will not help. there are many ideas that go in the wrong direction. i happen to believe if we can get the economy growing fast enough, there would be sufficient input into social

security. if people began to work longer -- if you are in the workforce, productive, and you have the economy growing at 3% or 4% per year, we could sustain social security. but if we adopt policies that lead to stagnant growth, and the population lives longer, and everyone has your kids, then you will run into a dynamic that will be hard to solve. >> is there a specific age would see as the neare retirement age? >> the process would be one where we would get a commission and see their recommendations across the board. then we could study that. >> isn't there already a commission? >> there was some years ago.

there is a debt commission, but we need to look again at social security and get a bipartisan consensus. >> my name is eve. lost myyears old and job tenures ago that i had worked at for 14 years. the company was sold and moved out of state. i educate myself, got a professional job, save my money for retirement, but i cannot touch it until i do retire without penalty. it was a nice amount, but i lost half of it in the wall street crash. what little i have left i cannot touch until i retire. i'm 59 years old.

no one is giving me a job. i'm out there all the time looking. it is not because i'm not doing anything. i want to know -- how old you think people should be before they retire? i cannot afford to wait 11 years to get my money that i have paid into in my ira and social security and i am tired of competing with people from other countries. i had some temp jobs a tick. i'm a graphic artist. the people in charge of the art department, a couple were from brazil. why don't i have that job? i am an american citizen. i did all the right things, lost my job, and now no one wants to hire me because i'm 59 years old. i'm competing with people even to get a minimum wage job. there are people who have two or three of those just to make the ends meet. in other in the wind and have no support. my unemployment ran out.

>> let me address that. one of the great problems we have 14.5 million unemployed in the country -- there is a real concern about the fact that we're not moving forward with legislation, bipartisan legislation, that has been introduced. i am a co-sponsor of the bill. the bill says you have a match up of the social security numbers of the employee who comes to get the job, or current employees with the social security office. we know there are 12 million people working on fake documents right now. people come here, commit document fraud, by a fake social

security number. it is in the system, in the data bank. if we matched that up, if the employer would call in, and we could lift the prohibition on this, the employers could be mandated to check to see if these are valid workers. the problem that you face is according to the gallup polling organization -- a friend works for them -- he says that if you extrapolate these numbers, there are 1 billion people would like to come to the u.s. we have a legal process for people to come here. it is the most generous in the world. but on top of that, we have many people who are circumventing the process. if you have 12 million fake social security numbers out there that people are using to work, it will affect

unemployment, especially during times of recession. this bill should be passed immediately. he and i are working to get it passed. >> i hope that you can. it is hard when you're my age to compete against kids coming from college try to pestilence, and people coming from other countries. if bill gates needs people to work on computers, i worked at cross-platform. i would be more than glad to take that job. >> good afternoon. i'm from the west fulleron. a couple of weeks ago when your town hall meeting was on i attempted to ask a question. i was cut off. you proceeded to answer about something i was not asking about. i hope you'll give me the chance

to finish. you have already been talking about deficits today, and this goes towards that. i am sure that you have heard the push to ask congress -- none of this is directed at you personally -- at your colleagues and government officials, state and federal levels. congress should be asked not to pass some laws that apply to us that do not apply to you guys. similarly, a vice versa. there's a big push to get rid of incumbents for that reason because no one is listening. it is not because you as individuals are not goindoing ad

job, but as a collective unit we're going nowhere as a country. apathy in this country that has ruled till now is being trumped by the situation, and how bad is getting. now maybe things will start to happen, especially of this incumbent thing coaster. all the issues out there this pertains to -- just the economics for now. the federal workers -- and i have the figures -- they earn 22% more than private-sector workers. that is just seller. the average federal civilian employee earns an average of $32,000 per year in a non-cash

remunerations compared to $9,800 for the average private-sector employer. why don't you freeze your wages, set an example, as to such time that they come down to the average of the civilian population? everyone else would be happy. it is unfortunate that people who might be doing a good job like yourself are being lumped with everyone else that is not doing their job properly, and we are all suffering as a result. yet you guys give yourselves perez's -- $5,300. i did not get a social security raises this year. funny about that. i have a pension, health care

-- i will gladly traded for yours any day. the other thing that annoys me is the fact that you guys get a pension after only four or eight years, for life. how much is it? it is much better than i got after working for 33 years. you guys need to wake up, and hopefully the country will too -- if we don't, you are all gone. >> other than your numbers, i agree with the thrust of your argument. i want to share that the house voted not to have a pay raise last or this year, and the senate as well. and you feel you have something there that says it does, but if you get to the government website, you will see -- that is not true for other workers. the other thing i will share --

the pensions are still too large, but the days of house members and senate members getting 90%, if they have been around long enough, they still can. law so theged at althat average salary or pension has been reduced by more than half. the average is still too high after retirement, but it is less. for the old-timers under the old system, what you're talking about is true. but some years ago we reform that. anyone in my situation -- there's no such thing as retiring at that kind of percentage over what you're making. making.