making over $250,000 a year in tax cuts. "the economist," calls this a true feel for republicans and democrats but this is the kind of thing they always argue about. this is not going to matter, we need big answers. we got ourselves into a big problem and the republicans and democrats pick these little issues and fight over them and metal -- never settle any of them. . .

>> signature mccain? >> there are two major in time and programs. social security and medicare. the democrats are dragging out the old thing that republicans

want to do away with social security. we just $500 billion out of medicare. there are 330,000 arizonans that have a program called medicare a vantage where they have choices to make. they are going to eliminate 4 330,000 citizens, their ability to have the program of their choice. we will repeal and replace obama-care and we will do it as one of our first agenda items beginning next january. >> mr. glassman? >> being a man who has been on government health care since the day he was born, he was talking about how bad health care reform is. the fact is, so security is a promise. we paid into it.

many in arizona are reliant on it. as the next u.s. senator, part of my job is to make sure that we prioritize the country and prioritize our investments and that the federal government keeps our promises to those that paid into the system. >> mr. joselyn? >> social security and medicare or issue for the green party. we have been looking at. the deficit commission is supposed to be bipartisan. both the republican head of that and the democratic head of that say that it is not off the table. we know that is code for. they are both going to take a look at it. social security is fully funded 32035. medicare will go up and it will fully fund both. in washington, i will fight

forever to save medicare and social security. the reason plan that we have to save social security failed. >> and thank you very much for the >> mr. nolan? >> -- thank you very much. >> mr. nolan? >> the government should not be in the business of providing medical care for its citizens. to the extent that it chooses to involve itself, we need to make the choices as wide as possible and i agree with mr. mccain and that it should be kept as long as we have medicare, but once again, republicans and democrats jawboned a lot but always vote for the new program and higher taxes. >> the next question is for mr. glassman. by most accounts, immigration reform will not happen until next year at the earliest. there are some actions that could be taken at the border to secure the borders such as home and security -- homeland

security. what is your plan to secure the border and insure that violence will not filter into arizona? >> we need to make sure we bring resources to the border. that does not mean buying billboards. that means hiring and training the appropriate number of agents. also, bringing technology to the border in the form of unmanned aerial vehicles your id that means jobs for arizona. -- aerial vehicles. that means jobs for arizona. there is a piece of legislation in dc called the ad jobs bill. it was written by the american farm bureau. it is the kind of bipartisan legislation that our former u.s. senator used to support. that is the kind of legislation

that should be moving forward to make sure that our economy can move forward. we need to separate those who are coming for the purposes to those that are coming forward. -- for sale purposes to those of our coming to work. -- who are coming to work. they should be required to go through background checks. they should learn english and have a system that they can go through at the end of the line. it is about having someone who will work with everyone to find solutions, not to serve as a partisan battering ram. what's your time is up. >> -- >> your time is up. are not coming here to work. i would change the major center

into a revenue source. i would do that by regulating, registering and taxing the 400,000 illegal workers that are here now. i would tax at 16%. it would raise 1.2 $5 billion. -- 1.2 $5 billion. -- $1.25 billion. >> i believe the original question was how we could help pilots from spilling across the border. most of that violence originates with the central american and mexican drug cartels. they are able to maintain a multibillion-dollar empire because drugs have been made illegal. this should end. the so-called war on drugs is a war on people who choose to use some drugs. we were finding the caliban as

part of our efforts to eradicate poppy fields in afghanistan and a trained the terrorists that attack our country. we need to treat jirga use -- treat drug use as a medical condition. >> thank you, very much. >> this is a national security issue, but it is also a human rights issue. they found over 2000 bodies in the desert outside of tucson. the bodies found of this year are nearing an all-time high. the mayor of mexico was just assassinated. we need to get our borders secure. we have a 10 point plan, among those which put people into incarceration for a period of

time in case they are multiple offenders. 17% of those who cross our border have committed crimes previously in this country. that is not acceptable. >> mr. glassman, a final word. >> we need to secure our border and we need reform. that needs to be led by our next united states senator. arizona has been doing the same thing over and over again, expecting a different result. john mccain has done the same thing for three decades. we need to send someone to washington that is committed to get things done, moving legislation forward and working to find actual solutions. >> senator, you did mention the fact that we have a national security problem on the border. so far, we have been trying to deal with the problem and treat it as a criminal matter. at this time, because of the

violence, should we begin to look at this problem as a diplomatic problem and try to bring our foreign policy -- should we change our foreign policy toward mexico? >> i think that we need to work as closely as we can with mexico there is a plan-as we can with max -- as we can with mexico. there is a plan to improve. the only organization in mexico that you can rely on is the mexican army because the police and others have been corrupted. this is a very serious problem. we have people crossing our border not just from mexico, but from all over the world. i believe that with a 10 point plan, with surveillance, personnel, and the completion of

the fence, we can secure our borders for the have made progress -- our borders. we have made progress. when you still have 241,000 people cross our border illegally in the last year, when you have intercepted over 1 million lbs. of marijuana, talk to our law enforcement people. they will tell you that it is a national security issue. we can, working with the mexican government, help them become more effective. it is a very serious issue and one that deserves the provision of our assets and our efforts and our strategy that will work with mexico, but will also get our borders secure. >> senator mccain, thank you very much. >> how about progress? how about results. i was the former vice mayor on

the tucson city council. i appreciate that we need more resources for our public safety. that is why i like to have the endorsements by the sheriff of yuma county. as well as the sheriff from santa cruz county. they understand that we need to bring resources home. you mentioned diplomacy. before we can reach out to the government of mexico, we need a senator for the state of arizona that will do this. we need someone to work with people. that is what this campaign is about. >> thank you, very much. >> illegal immigration is about jobs. that is the last line of defense. the job site. all of this about putting troops here and video cameras there, if it happens at the job site, that

is what people are coming here, for the jobs. after being senator for 24 years and saying that we are mad at the federal government because they have not done anything is absurd. we have to do something that the job site. we need to ibm and tax and so we can raise revenue for arizona. we can turn a negative into a positive. i have an immigration policy. and others policy. >> thank you very much, david nolan? >> to end the violence on the border, we must end the war on drugs. prohibition didn't work in the 1920's when the distribution of alcohol was turned over to al capone and other criminals, and it is not working now. we have more americans in jail per-capita that other nations in the world and most of them are there because of trivial violations of drug laws.

that is morally wrong and it is counterproductive and extremely expensive. as far as building the wall, i will say that the last thing we need is a $6 billion wall across the southern united states that is grossly expensive and will someday be used to keep americans inside if things continue to go bad. >> thank you, mr. nolan. senator mccain? >> first of all, we need to secure our borders and then we can move on to other issues. other provisions that can resolve this issue. if we do not secure the borders first, we will find ourselves with another group of people that have come to this country illegally and then we will have to do with it over again. there seems to be the belief that we are unable to secure the borders. we are certainly able to do so. other countries do.

it is our responsibility to our center -- to our citizens. >> you have stated that the the a model could provide better services given the recent scandals and continued complaints about the va, how can you convince the american public that the government can run a well managed, efficient and save health care system? >> i do not think that your complaints are for all different plans of health care. everybody that i have talked to that used the d.a. on a regular basis had nothing but good things to say about it. the technicians and doctors have developed their own software system. it away from all the brass. they use personal computers to record what people are taking. it is the most efficient system.

we have an average of $7,200 a year and other countries if of hundred -- other countries pay 3500. we can both expand coverage and lower the cost of health care. that is the key. we cannot be competitive with other countries if we are spending that much on health care. it is just another drag on the economy. i have been a businessman and an economist and i know that what you spend and what you get, under my idea, we could have people that do not have health care and be served with an expanded va. that would take the burden of health care off of the employer and off of the state's. >> thank you, very much. mr. nolan? >> i find it interesting that

the republicans and democrats believe that every problem is a big new government programs solution. think of when you go down to the department of motor vehicles or the post office. is that the kind of health care that you want? people come to this country from canada and great britain because it takes six months, a year or longer to get what is available within weeks in the united states. nationalized health care, taxpayer financed health care is a bad plan. any time the government gets involved, you can count on it costing a lot more than estimated and it will take a lot longer to complete. we do not need a government health care program. >> i am proud of our thousands of people all over the country who care for our veterans and i our veterans of administration system.

whether it is a veteran of afghanistan that needs the kind of help that is necessary to come all the way back to our society. to very serious issues remain. one is posttraumatic stress disorder and the number of suicides that are taking place. we need to devote a lot more time and energy to those issues. i am proud of the va, but that'll be the first ones to tell you this. >> with all due respect, and senator mccain, i respect your service to our country. this is about his service to the residents of arizona. we have over 500,000 military families right here in arizona. i am proud of my family is one of them. what about resources to our veterans and administration --

veterans administration facilities? veterans, i asked you, do you have an active to bring the resources home? we can do better. >> mr. joslyn? >> when i got involved in this, that intrigued with how the system has become so efficient. if you would, go to my website and click on health care. it will explain a lot more. there is a two-hour video that goes over all of it. i heard david talk about health care. 80% of canadians support their health care. the thing that we have the best health care is wrong.

>> we go back to mr. nolan. you have advocated cutting government programs by 50% for it what you cut out and what do you keep? >> -- 50%. what do you cut out and what do you keep? >> we need to privatize a red top of the programs by 40%. we need to cut how much we are spending. we do not need to be involved in unconstitutional, and declared wars around the world because we were spelled it -- we were fed faulty data. there were no weapons of mass destruction. we need to adopt the jeffersonian policy of

friendship and commerce with all. we can cut military spending. we can differ and eliminate most of the entitlement programs. we can reduce interest payments and we will keep spending more and more because the borrowing more and more. we can make cuts across the board. >> senator mccain? back to some have to go of the things that mr. glassman said. i received the highest award of every veterans' organization in america. i am proud of my service to our veterans. we can eliminate the stimulus package. that is hundreds of billions of dollars that remained unspent -- that remain unspent. we need to go back to the 2008

spending and that will limit some of the billions and billions of dollars that are unnecessary. for -- in pork barrel spending -- end pork-barrel spending. >> we can eliminate the giant tax credits that are reported by the united states senate and congress to big oil companies. if we want to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels, let's invest in those areas as well. when john mccain talks about pork barrel spending, i know it is a phrase that has gotten him pretty far. the projects that john mccain refuses to champion are the water issues. infrastructure projects that would get arizona working and would stimulate our economy and stimulate more tax dollars.

we need a cut on those big oil subsidies. >> mr. joslyn? >> they have not mentioned america's middle class. basically, those of us in the middle class have been getting the shaft for the past 30 years. everything is getting more expensive. the taxes have gone up. republicans and democrats are both the cause, not a solution. that is why i started getting interested in this. i saw my life savings go down the drain. i started studying the economy and that is how like him off with the flat tax that will put more money in the hands of the working-class and middle-class and get the economy stimulated again so we can grow our way out of the problem. >> mr. nolan? >> i am amused by the idea that we can use the unspent stimulus

money. there is no unspent stimulus money. there is no money at all. it is all funny money. the idea that there is this huge pile of hundreds of billions of dollars sitting around, we have to end at these stimulus programs which are bailouts for big banks and corporations. >> the next question, how does your experience prepare you to be arizonas next u.s. senator? excited about working for arizona and working for arizona. my experience is the exact experience that every united states senator should have. being able to reform -- to return phone calls.

i was not just endorsed by the labor unions and planned parenthood, i was endorsed by the tucson association of realtors. once elected, we work on legislation and ordnances that were important to our community. gray water plumbing on all new homes for it water is a key issue for our state. i have a ph.d. and i have a track record of building consensus. if i can do that at the local level, i will be able to do that in washington d.c.. i do not care whether members of the tea party or for other party think. the idea is a good idea for arizona. i have a track record of working in a bipartisan fashion. it is about being responsive. it is about caring about my constituents and working for the future of our community.

i am running for the senate because i want to make arizona the greatest place to live and work and raise a family. we have to do that by building consensus. but as the track record that i have of the local level. >> i have been a small businessman. i started several businesses. i look at things differently than career politicians. i look at things based on what the cost and what we get. out of get -- get out of them. i look at the productivity. the tax system is at the center of this. nobody concentrates on how we raise the money and where it comes from and how that affects the economy. that is how i got into it. i believe it is about productivity and making america work more efficiently and better

so that we can work together in the 21st century. >> mr. nolan? >> if you listen carefully to what he says, it is all glittering generalities and buzz words. it is very ill in the way of specifics. rodney glassman is a democrat. the democrats produced some of the largest new expensive programs in the united states. he will not vote to cut spending. john mccain is an honorable man. he has not done much to contain spending, either. if you send a republican or democrat back to congress, in january, we will see more of the same. we need to break the mold. we need to think outside the box. >> senator mccain? >> i know that mr. glassman voted to raise taxes.

the mayor of tucson has endorsed me as long -- as well as our firefighters and city councils. i have been working with them for arizona. these are tough times. it we have to keep people in their homes and we have to give small businesses the credit and way is to hire and expand their businesses. that is the way out of this mess. 'mr. s first vote in the united states senate would be to vote for harry reid as the majority leader of the united states senator. i will not do that. . is hard to do with john mccain because he has the worst attendance record of anyone in the u.s. senate while he was

busy promoting himself. i have ideas. i am not running for barack obama or against john mccain. i am running for all of us. we need to be focused on jobs and education in the future of our state in the future of our nation. that is why i asked you to visit my website to learn more. >> senator ernest macfarlane gave the country the gi bill. but what do you feel is your legislative legacy considering that arizona has returned you to the congress for 28 years? >> in keeping with those individuals that you just mentioned, and others, would be a reputation for honesty and integrity and straight talk. perhaps making a significant contribution to keeping our

nation safe. arizona is a place full of our men and women who are serving in the national guard and they are a battle -- they are a vital part of our nation. i believe that i have been right. i will put my support for the men and women who were serving as an area where i would like to have a legacy. i would also like to include that i have been involved in many issues and much legislation that keeps the beautiful, pristine beauty of our great state preserved for hundreds of years to come. whether being called the grand canyon's best friend or native american water rights issues, i hope that honesty and integrity as a person who contributed to our nation's security and

keeping arizona the most beautiful nation on earth. >> we have had john mccain back to washington d.c. for three decades and we have far too much to show for it already. we live in a state where more than 50% of our homeowners are upside down on their mortgages. while he talks about straight talk, he was for immigration reform before he was against it. he was for don't ask don't tell before he was against it. i get dozens of calls from arizonans across the state regarding the uranium mine after it is time to turn the page for it -- the uranium mine. it is time to turn the page. >> mr. joslyn? >> what do what think of one i

think of john mccain? i think of his service. he is the most pro-war senator we have had in a long time. we have been involved in several wars and the all have idealistic names -- they all have idealistic names. i am supporting the proposal by bill gates to extend -- to spend one 20th of what we spend on oil on clean energy. >> mr. nolan? >> senator no one has a distinguished legacy. -senator mccain has a distinguished legacy. let's face it. john mccain is no consistent defender of our liberties. one of the reasons that i got into this race is because right

now, at this very moment, senator mccain is the lead sponsor of senate bill 3000 the one-3081. -- senate bill 3081. nobody would sponsor such a bill. >> senator mccain? >> i hope that our viewers will not judge me by the remarks that they just made. they may be a bit biased. i would have you asked your local mayor or city council and local police and fire people that i have worked with closely to make sure that we keep arizona safe and that we get as much as possible to our citizens.

i am proud of my relationship. >> thank you, very much. our last question will be to mr. joslyn. you appear to be advocating winning the hearts and minds of the afghan people. is that as important as conducting military operations? how do you win the hearts and minds of people in a country where they are seeking sanctuary? >> there are two books that i think that people should read to understand where i'm coming from. war -- lee wilson's charlie wilson's war". our military is not too big, it does not fit the mission. when we first went to afghanistan, it was to bomb them

back into the stone age, but they were already living in the stone age. we needed to spend a long time, but not as much money. it is a difficult thing to do. it is a difficult thing for the military to convert from a program where we are spending $100 billion in afghanistan. we are spending between one and $2 billion per al qaeda fighter for every year. we do not think it will work. the afghan army is so dysfunctional. we have been training them for nine years. 90% of them are illiterate. the desertion rate is through the roof. we need a new strategy in afghanistan. i do not believe that pulling out is a new strategy. >> mr. nolan?

>> i am reminded shortly after we went to afghanistan that 15 saudi arabia attacked the united states and killed 3000 americans to read what you do? invade afghanistan. we should never have gone there. we should bring all of our troops home as soon as we can as long as it does not endanger their safety. a century ago, a man said that war is the health of the state. war is the single biggest enterprise by which government expands its power and scope. it is one small government and you cannot wage wars around the world. >> we cannot allow afghanistan to return to the tax on the united states. we cannot forget what happened that caused 9/11. i have written a book-i read a

book that helps you understand afghanistan. we have the finest military. i am so proud of the job at the arizona national guard is doing three i am proud of the work that i did on their behalf. -- is doing. i am proud of the work that i did on their behalf. you cannot tell the enemy that you are live-leading and expect to proceed -- you are leaving and expect to succeed. >> we should not be telling our enemy that we are leaving and we cannot let them know every time that there is a problem that we will come rushing in. john mccain has never led a surge that he didn't like.

when i use the term of nation building, i am talking about building our schools, our infrastructure, bringing our tax dollars home and making arizona the priority. that is what we need from our united states senator. it is about jobs and education for a spirit is a priority that our senator needs to have. >> mr. joslyn? >> i think that we should learn -- i was against the war in iraq to begin with. the washington post said that the cost of the war is three trillion dollars. that is $10,000 for every man and woman and child in the united states. mr. mccain said it is time to pull the trigger -- the trigger. i do not feel comfortable with mr. mccain still standing in washington. it is hard to believe that he

has seen a war that he didn't like. >> now for closing statements. >> i entered this race to campaign on three primary issues. we must dramatically cut the size, cost, power and intrusiveness of the federal government. something that the governments and -- that the republicans and democrats talk about but rarely do. if you want a stimulus program that works, think about how much better off you would be if he got every penny in your paycheck. we need to find out what is going on as far as loans to big banks. the more i got into this campaign, the more i became concerned about said bill 3081. do not take my word about what is is about -- is about.

-- it is about. investigate that built the early. it would turn the united states into the old east german or soviet union and it should not be allowed to pass. i am appalled that the sitting senator from arizona co- sponsored such an american piece of legislation. mccain -- iohn juniorlike to be your senio senator. >> it is time to turn the page. the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, expecting a different result. my wife and i are having a baby girl this november. we are living, working and raising a family right here in arizona. it is time to have a signature that is focused on jobs and education. since the beginning of the

recession, we have lost thousands of jobs to rid we need a u.s. senator -- thousands of jobs. we need a u.s. senator that has ideas. we need to focus on green jobs for arizona. the kinds of jobs that will allow people to save their homes. germany is not waiting. china is not waiting. we need to have a center that will reduce our dependence on fossil fuel. we need a u.s. senator that will support our veterans. we need a u.s. senator that is working for the future for our families. i ask senator mccain, please continue to have town halls with the spirit is disrespectful to the voters of arizona for you to give the 60 minutes for a term

of that is six years and would be your fourth decade in washington d.c.. >> senator mccain? >> as mr. glassman just said, this election is a choice. you have a choice between my efforts to repeal obama-care and start the pork-barrel -- stop the pork barrel spending or mr. glassman, who wants another stimulus package and supports this waste of overborne dollars trillion-over $1 trillion -- over $1 trillion. he is clearly out of step. do out of step with arizona and the people of our state. i am proud that the f-35 is coming to the air force base. i am proud that i've become

involved in numerous environmental legislation that protects the pristine beauty of arizona. i am proud of my service and support for veterans across our state. i have listened to the people and i know that they know that we can come out of this mess that we are in an by stopping spending and by getting our fiscal house in order and by restoring america's greatness. arizonas best days are ahead of us. i think you for allowing me to serve and i ask for your vote. >> mr. joslyn? >> i hope i made a connection with republicans, democrats and independents who won resolutions for the worst economy since the great depression. i knew that the odds were long getting into this campaign. i believe it would come down to this.

i have been encouraged by meeting with citizens that want to restore america's middle class. i have been encouraged with what has been happening across the united states. people running for office for the first time or defeating career politicians. 58% of americans wanted to vote for a third party. i believe that i can actually win this campaign. to do it, i want every one that believes what i have said and likes what i said, go to my website and print out the car window signs. if you want to send a message to washington, you can do it by electing a member of the arizona green party to the senate. believe me go to your computer's and get that name

recognition thing going. we can actually make it happen. i have enjoyed this evening. thank you, everybody. >> this has been a very enlightening discussion. thank you very much we want to thank all the candidates for an enlightening discussion. thank you for joining us third from all us here, thank you. >> sees them local content vehicles are traveling the country as we look at the contested house races. >> what is keeping you up at night these days? >> all the money that the

government is spending. i wonder what will happen to my grandchildren. >> we need to make some changes. i totally agree. >> right, right. basically it is mathematically. i think in an economy like this, raising taxes is generally going to be a bad idea. >> when times are better -- >> i would say, look, let's put everything on the table and saw the problem but you are going to have to start making trade offs. if you look at the height and benefit side first.

general philosophy i have. can we work the spending side before work in the tax side. >> of the democratic side you have banned seal, third time -- dan seals. this is his third time running. hoping three times the charm. he is running against mark kirk. used to work for -- and the capital in the mortgage finance for commercial. on the right you have robert dole, political newcomer, he owns a pest control company in the chicago area that is pretty well known. he lives in highland park. they both have three kids. they both make over $100,000 a year so they are both of the same economic class but on two different sides of the political spectrum. it is a district that traditionalists and the

republicans in congress and boats democrat for president. that makes it seem to democrats that they can take it. one of maybe three or four seats of the country that they literally see as a jump ball that they can get back even though they know they will lose 10 or 20, maybe even 30 or 40 seats across the country otherwise. it stretches from the north shore suburbs, very eat, very wealthy, very well educated suburb of chicago, highland park. it goes a little bit west into some more moderate income suburbs. farett's which is pretty north into more struggling areas like waukegan and north chicago that is heavily hispanic and largely poor. >> town jobs here in the waukegan better on the bus line, no way. you'll never get a job. a lot of people out here who

want to support their family instead of being on low income or going to get food stamps, everybody who wants to just sit down and do nothing. there are a lot of us who want to work, like to work. where do we start? we have no star. -- no start. you have some programs to try to help you. it is not successful. if we need something successful to help us support our families instead of being out here in poverty doing nothing. >> to adjust this regulation forcing companies to go overseas, where the pacific rim. >> i think voters are most concerned, is like everyone else, but maybe even more so, is jobs, jobs, jobs. in addition to that, taxes. you have part of the district that is really hit hard by unemployment. above 15% in some of the areas. they want to hear the candidates talking about how they will put them to work. >> the biggest challenge for me in getting elected is making

sure people understand the differences between myself and my opponent. what i found in talking to the voters is they want someone who can make the decisions to get our economy back on track but not willing to compromise on their social values while they do so. whereas my opponent was to rights, and to protect them. my opponent wants to weaken environmental laws, i want to strengthen them. what we heard today, whereas my opponent wants to privatize social security, i think that would be a terrible gamble to make and i am not willing to add $2.20 trillion to the national debt. >> i did what we have to do is put people back to work by creating an environment that allows the private sector to grow, expand, create jobs, not the government. there will be stark contrasts between me and my opponent on how to do that. my opponent has been in line with pelosi and the democrats about growing the government as the answer. i don't believe it is the case.

i believe there is a better way. a better way is empowering individuals and small businesses to grow, to invest in technology, equipment, materials, to expand their business. >> trying to run into the middle. and they are running right into each other. dan seal is going after him on social issues. trying to portray him as anti- abortion even though dole says he is pro-choice and tried to attack, the environment and all of the hot-button issues that really trend well for democrats. and robert dole is going after seal taxes and budget, trying to align him with the healthcare bill. he is trying to portray him as one to raise taxes. that is the other side, the two components that make up the majority of voters -- socially moderate and fiscally conservative. they need to really come apart from the parties because the

parties are not popular anywhere across the country, it seems. and seals needs to stand aside from the democrats. even though obama is still polling about 50% of the district, i think voters are not interested in making sure there is a democratic controlled congress or a republican controlled congress. they really need to portray themselves as independents. both tag lines for both campaigns and part independence. i believe the last time in 2008 $10 million or more was spent on both sides. the candidates themselves, raising between $2 million up to $4 million or more but you also have interest groups playing him -- here because of this is a place democrats think they can take a republican seat. you will see the democratic congressional campaign committee and a republican congressional campaign committee dumping $1 million, $2 million, $3 million for ads. it is very expensive to buy ads in chicago.

to put their chips down. >> c-span's local content vehicles are travelling the country as we look at some of the most closely contested house races leading up to this november's midterm elections. for more information on what the local content vehicles are up to this election season, visit our website. next, the second annual washington ideas formed through conversations with gov. haley barbour and virginia senator jim webb and a roundtable discussion on the 2010 midterm elections. >> this weekend and through december, listen to landmark supreme court cases on c-span radio. >> i believe the record in the case that at no time during the interrogation and prior to his confession was he advised of his right to remain silent or his

right to counsel or of his right to consult with counsel. >> miranda v arizona, this saturday on c-span radio. nationwide on satellite radio channel 132 and nationwide at you can learn about the nation's highest court with the new book>> right, right. the supreme courtbasically it is mathematically. >> mississippi gov. haley barbour avoided answering rumors that he will run for president in 2012 of the atlantic magazine ideas forum held here in washington d.c.. jeffrey goldberg asked gov.

barbara about the 2010 elections and whether republicans will take over the house and senate in the upcoming elections. we will also hear from senator jim webb and the publisher of the cook political report who predicts that republicans will take over the u.s. house in the november elections. >> hello, thank you for being here. gov. barbara, thank you very much for coming. you know introduction to this crowd. -- you need no introduction to this crowd. many of you obviously know him better as the former chairman of the republican national committee. i want to to just jump right in and if we can.

imagine that your still chairman of the rnc, right now. you are feeling pretty good. you're looking at a possible blow out. on the other hand, you have a succession of people come into your office. grand paul, who has second dealt about the fact. christine o'donnell, who believes that scientists are putting mouse brains in humans. are you thinking to yourself that it is good that we're about to win, but what is going on with my party? >> no. a lot of the things that i did as chairman is that we did not endorse people in primaries for it we did not endorse incumbents

in primary started. we said that if you cannot win the government lost the republican primaries without us, what is wrong with you -- we said that if you cannot win the republican primaries without us, what is wrong with you? my view is that whoever the republicans in colorado and mississippi and new york, whoever the nominate is who we will support. we are betty l. -- better as the bottom up party. if there is an open process, like a primary, whoever wins, that is who i will support. >> nv talked about using a remitted to deal with some of the problems in congress. is there anything else beyond the pale? >> i cannot quote anything has

never -- anything anyone has ever said. i will be for whoever wins the nomination in the primary. they don't need to be from mississippi. sarah palin is more influential in the endorsement process. what does that say to you? you spoke of the need to stick together. the tea party is the republican party. talk about this a little bit more. what is this meeting for the republican party? >> and the rnc should not be endorsing people in primaries. if you look at this moment, i was chairman of the party in 1994. we picked up 54 and the house

and we went from 17 to 31 governors. we gained 8 in the senate and then we started having party switchers. we had the first republican majority in both houses for the first time in 40 years i was real proud of that. -- in 40 years. i was real proud of that. we have had more energy, more intensity, more involvement by more people sooner than 1994. >> give us your prediction as best as you can. >> one thing that i understand, nothing matters until november 2. can things happen? yes, sure. people can make mistakes. i do not count any chickens until they get hatched. right now, the environment is

better than it was in 1994 and that has been the case for more than a year. going back to the summer of last year when you saw a lot of people who were middle-class, working class, they tended to be a little bit on the older side and got mad and got up off the sofa and decided for the first time that they were to do something about this. . .

with a and getting interviewed, i inadvertently

sealed by position as the worse newlywed husband ever. [laughter] she provided great support while i was in captivity. one the questions we look adhere is what do you tnk history's verdict will be on the last two years and in my experiencend prior to kidnapping i've covered pakistan and afghanistan since 2001. i think history will look back at an awkward truth that existed since the 9/11 attacks and has been more clear in the last two years. while the pakistan army received more than $10 million since 2001, itheltered taliban commanders who led an insurgency that killed more than 1300 soldiers in afghanistan and continues to gain strength today. the journalt steve call said the united states is at war with its own ally. the rational behind pakistan's

relationship with the afghan taliban is they view them as proxies they could use to proctor influence in afghanistan and the united states is caught up in this indian pakistan rivalry played out on the ground in pakistan and afghanistan. i'll talk about my captivity to give you a sense of what is the situation in the tribal areas and what i saw there. for better or worse is one the few outsider as foreigners to be in that area and see what it's like there. what i saw during my time in captivity ishat the taliban regime that the united states thought had toppled in 2001 is alive and thriving. it move a few miles east over the border into the tribal areas of pakistan and living among the afghanistan and pakistani areas

are arab members of al-qaeda and other foreign militants and yog afghan and pakistanis are indoctrine enated and told to support al-qaeda's goal that -- after gan ards talked about their plans to carry out attacks in the united states itself. it was deeply troubled what i saw there. this is a large caveat of what i describe here refers only to the tribal areas where i was held captive. i was among the most hard line taliban afghan-taliban network that kidnapped me. what i say doesn't apply to the other groups in afghanistan that thought to be more moderate. this group is closest to al cay

dan fields. i was kit napped with others at th time in november of 2008. we were kid kidnapped an hour outside of kabul and drove for two days in the afghan country side and didn't see in the afghan government or united states security forces during that period and walked over the mountainings into the tribal areas of pakistan and saw all the government check posts were abandoned by pakistani forces and instead young taliban were monitoring the posts. through the seven months in activity myself and my afghan colleagues saw that there were foreign militants strolling lo the markets in major towns and they were relaxed. i watcd a local soccer game with my face covered with a scarf and could see militants watching the games.

there were taliban police patrolling the roads and construction crews repairing road. it was a ministate. my guardsook bomb making classes, and there were large explosions shot off in the largest town and there's a pakistani military base, but they did not come off their base to investigate the explosions occurring in town. throughout my captivity my guards watched videos that created an alternate reality for young taliban. they essentially portrayed a global hindu alliance at war with islam. they believe the 9/11 attacks were staged to preoccupy a muslim country and tens of thousands of afghans were killed in the initial bombings in 2001. i lived and was in captivity during the israeli attack in

gaza that enraged them and other attacks in kasmir. they believed that arican troops were carrying out force conversions to christianty among afghans and believed u.s. and nato troops were forcing women to work as prostitutes. i ved with a young pakistani for six weeks training to be a suicide bomber. he seemed amused by me and saw westerners and myself as well as a weak who were focused on earthly pleasures. he beeved he had heard various things about americans and my family is christian, i'm not religious myself, but heard questions about christians and that all christians wanted to live for a thousand years because we care about the joys of this world and american soldiers hunted down a wild animal in afghanistan and if

they captured onehey brought it to the officers and served it to them and the american officers would eat it and that's a great honor for an american soldier. that animal i found out is a pig, and eating pigs is considered dirty and he felt and believed that a necktisu as what i'm wearing today was a secret simple of christianity. for this young suicide bomber, en i asked why he wanted to be a suicide bomber he said this was a burden for any trueuslim and family relationships did not matter with him and his relationship with god was the only important thing to him. they brainwash the me and separate them from their families and tell them their relationships don't matter and it's got god and that's how families lose touch with the young suicide bombers. my guards were poorly educated. one had a high school degree and a final one was given a book that described and we've heard this before, described how 70

virgins await a martyr who dies. when he read it he held it close and e-and he sounded out each word and read like a 5th grader. they have never seen a world beyond afghanistan and pakistan. in the spring of 2009 when i was in captivity, if you remember a gunman shot 13 people in an immigration center in upstate new york. a local pakistani commander took credit for the attack. my guards were overjoyed because they felt a revenge attack had been carried out. later on that day ere was a radio broadcast explaning the gunman was vietnamese and the guards were puzzled because they were told a muslim carried out the attack and i was asked if vietnamese people were muslim and i said that's not true.

they believe the three somalia pilots were shot and it was a united states con conspiracy and believed that swine flu was god's retribution against people who eat pork which is a for bidden practice and they told-their religious duty to force extreme i islamic law across pakistan and talked to bin laden with rev rains and i had groups sit in front of me and talk about a prophesy they heard that an army of black flags would emerge from an and acceptability name of the -- ancient area of afghanistan and these flags would liberate the cities from a regime that controlled them. one young boy met, he was attending a local proam and he

said he wanted to be a suicide bomber when he grew up. i said, well, what if there's peace in the area, and you can do what you would like? he said i want to be a holy worrier and i said there's definite peace, what's your third choice, and he said he wanted to be a muslim. that's the culture today and the ideology thrives in those areas. i saw close up the effort to counter what's going on there. there was drones hovering over us most days on captivity. one drone strike occurred just outside of our house when we were being held in and area and the taliban fear the drone strikes and they are generally accurate. they did kill civilians, but in each of the strikes in my

captivity, there were foreign militants killed. the result is there's a sort of terrifying police state from the local people who live in the tribal areas and they round up who they believe are spies and hang them after the drone strikes and a local farmer is accused of being a spy. he denied and pakistani mill substantiates tortured him, disem bowled him and chopped off his leg. at that point he confessed. they then decapitated him and then hung his body in the local market in the south country as an example for local people. what i saw in a sense with the drone strike was a stalemate. they do decapitate by killing the leaders, but they exaggerate

civilian casualties and neither side is gaining control. my sense and the sense of analysts is that no re control outside control exist herentil the pakistani army moves into the area and forces on the ground. unfortunately i'm sitting here talking to you not because i was rescued by the pakistani army but because our afghan-taliban felt little threat. the last house they held us captive in was only three quarters of a mile away. on june 19 we were able to scale a wall while our guards slept that night, walked to the base, and begged them to take us inside. we were very afraid there would be pakistani members of the military handing us back to the taliban, but there was a young pakistani captain who was a moderate and was actually talking to his girlfriend on the

phone when we showed up outside at 2 a.m.. he allowed us on to the base, and he apologized to me for the kidnapping and said what the taliban followed was not the true islam that he believes exists and it was a perversion of the faith. it goes back to the problem that american policymakers face. how does the united states back positive members of the military and not the pakistani intelligence service that are widely reported to be supporting the afghan-taliban. ambassador holbrooke will speak here and secretary gates and others repeatedly asked the military to move in the area where i was held captive. they declined to do so and it will take a year to create a defense there. they appear to be able to -- at this point the pakistan military can outbluff the united states and appear to be willing

to risk a cutoff of military assistance and the u.s. is willing to risk a cutoff in cooperation. the pakistans are willing to risk terrorist attacks on the united states. as far as i can tell they continue to have a differentiation with who they are fighting. the pakistani army thought the pakistan taliban in the two years view them as enemies of the state, but they continue to see the network and taliban networks they can use against india. during captivity i saw the two groups work seem leslie to the and the differentiation is a false one. we were held in pakistani-taliban areas and then afghan-talib areas and the cooperation was seamless. this issue is now a direct security threat to the united states.

the pakistani who carried out the failed attempt of the car bomb in times square trained where i was. he spent 40 days with the taliban and five of them were spent getting bomb making training like my guards did. this week reports emerged of capture of a german ntional. he's according to german intelligence reporting groups of gunman are trained to carry out attacks in europe to resemble the november 2008 attacks in hotels in mumbai that killed thousands of people. as far as i know this would be the first case of the afghan-taliban being involved in carrying out an international terrorist attack outside of afghanistan itself.

these international plots are what make me believe simply withdrawing from the region is not an option. based on what i saw, mill taments in the areas ll take over both afghanistan and pakistan, pakistan as you know has more than 50 nuclear weapons and could launch attacks against the united states itself. people talk about education as the answer. that's clearically part of the answer, but unfortunately one of the places i was held captive in the tribal areas was a school built by the pakistani government to win over local hearts and minds and i was also held in a health clic. you can build multiple schools and health clinic, but they are taken over by the pal -- pal ban. twice as many pakistani soldiers died in 2001 as american soldiers have died in afghanistan. the floods diverted the forces this year from fighting the taliban, but i fear that the

pakistani military is overconfident in its about to control the afghan-taliban. they believe they can deliver them peace negotiations if needed in afghanistan and again they believe they can use them as proxies against india. i think the history of pakistan's effort to control the pakistani- taliban so that probably will not happen. the pakistani taliban rebelled against the government and killed and injured more than 5,000 people on suicide attacks in 2009, and i think the afghan taliban will rebel against their control as well. so the next session is ambassador holbrooke explaning his difficult job in dealing with the question how to get pakistan to address this on a personal note i have to say i owe him a word of thanks. during the war in bosnia i was detained forten days. he worked there to win my release, and then again during

my captivity in afghanistan official in the bush and obama administraon rked for my release, but hepent more time dealing with my family and helping them and any other official. my first phone call after the escape, i told my wife and i apologized to her and she forgave he and i told her my days as a war correspondent were over. my mother was a little more stern with me. [laughter] she said she was revoking my passport. [laughter] i suspect ambassador holbrooke would agree with my mother's approach. ank you very much. [applause]

[inaudible conversations] >> so, hello, everybody,'m christine, and in most of my reporting i met ambassador holbrooke being a foreign correspondent for cnn, and now over the last year i moved i often stand on tables to get your attention, yes, and now i'm at abc this week and what i'm trying to do is bring more of a perspective from the international world, the kindof things that richard holbrooke deals with and bring them to a wider american audience, so it's great to be here with you all and it's great to be here with ambassador holbrooke, and we are going to chat for the next half hour. i'd like to first welcome you here and i appreciate you've changed your schedule to be here in front of this very important audience, and this as we all

know i being streamed online as well. let's start with where david rohde left off. you've known him thrgh imisonments and arrests and deattentions. >> all of them. >> first in bosnia which i was covering and i was there during the process and david with wa the seshes at the time. how do you remember those times forging peace and dealing with the humanitarian voice as well? >> well, david managed to get himself captured in a bad position, and we decided to just stop the negotiations until he was released i remember being told you're crazy enough to stop an entire peace negotiation for one journalist who shouldn't have been where he was, and we said, yes, we are, my wife was chair effort journalist and

ter three days they got him out, but my most vivid memory is the last time i saw them before captivity at a wedding of a friend of ours, and he and kris fin were not yet married, but gage ltd. he said he's going back to afghanistan, and i said jokingly, don't get yourself captured again. he said, no, no, that will never happen. so then in his articles and books, he tried to -- this is quite an interesting story because it's inside the taliban. he tried to explain to the taliban that he was to be regarded in a different way because he had tried to expose the atrocities of the bosians and he thought that would make a difference. they googled him, and it showed

the relationship to me. >> the taliban googled him? >> the taliban can google too, facebook, the whole works. [laughter] >> have you seen their facebook accountants? they're great. [laughter] the interesting thing is when they googled him, the exact opposite happened. they are so brutal and ruthless. is david in the room? you can confirm this if i get it wrong. they are so ruthless that instead of realizing what david was trying to do, they got harsher on him and said you're the best friend of richard holbrooke and he's now president obama's special representatives for this region, and so it didn't help at all. is that a fair representation of what happened? >> yeah, and think googled me andthey watched documentaries and newscasts. >> you know, these obviously

leads to a natural next question. number one, david was precisely where he was meant to be to expose the atrocities whether it was bosnia or afghanistan a he was where he was met to be and unfortunately had to pay the price for a long time, but the fact that the taliban googled might be a laugh line, but it also means that they are savvy. >> yes. >> they understand what they are dealing with. they understand how to reach the audience that they want to reach and how to mapute the public's space and the media space and the hearts and minds space. >> the cliche on that that is accurate is they are not the taliban of the 1990s. they have learned -- well, blowing up buddhas which was like a worldwide wakeup call to who they were. they have become more sophisticate the, but they have

not changed their brutal roots and ideology andoals. >> how does that media savvy that does exist complicate efforts or matc up to the efforts of the united states and international forces trying to defeat them? just take that realm first, the media space. >> i don't think it's affected perceptions of the taliban and europe and europe. >> in their region is where it's important. >> well, in their region they are trying to exploit targeting of opportunity, the traditional targets of anti-americanism that we're fighting on muslim soil for christian crew saiders. david's point about the taliban think that 06 pblght of american women are prostitutes. this is not a small point. it shows that they are playing into a field of enormous ignorance in which

communications primarily is still by radio but with highly literal and highly acceptable people. >> right, the question is who's winning the battle now? >> well, in afghanistan public opinion poll after poll is showing is doesn't work. the afghans remember the black years, especially the women. public support of th taliban also is in the same range, the high single digits, 7 or 8 or 9% and clearly in any free choice, they don't want the taliban back. >> it is a very, very important point because so many americans actually, i think many americans against the war and who would like the troops come back sooner rather than later say the people of afghanistan don't want us there. certainly in my reporter i've seen the opposite except for in the tough taliban areas. >> millis afghans put their trust in us.

if you go there you see things which are not well-reported, very touching things to train civil servants, women's empowerment programs,rebuild agriculture, it was an agriculture exporter til the soviet invasion, but the country is so broken by 32 years of continuous war and a series of mistakes starting with the soviet invasion and what's called the "charlie wilson's war," but they always missed the punch line leading to where we are today, and then timely, the consequences of what's now going on, so it is a broken society, and we -- but on the core issue, this is not a popular uprising, but i do wa to make an important caveat that was said and echoes in my mind while working in vietnam

and elsewhere. you give me two men, i can take any village in china. by good, he meant ruthless. what was pioneered in the 1920s is sop for gorillas all over the word. you go in the village, kill the land owner, kill the local officials, terrorize the village and good people begin to become neutralized and you begin to take over. >> let's explore that because as david of -- because as david was saying and witnessed firing of drones across the border, the taliban still exists and there's still big areas that they control or at least they can disrupt. in pakistan apparently and tell me if this is correct, you assessed the pakistani dpoft is not going to go off of their militant group and you've gone

over the border now, pakistan seems to have retaliated by closing down certain routes to bring things in. whereoes that stand rit now, and how spread out and how effective are the taliban along that border? >> let me address those two questions. on the first point, the overall relationship with pakistan is complicated, more complicated than any strategic relationship i've ever been involved in, but at the end of the day, success in afghanistan, however you define success, is not achievable unless pakistan is part of the solution, not part of the problem, and we can sit in this room and say all the things that a lot of you may be thinking about that, but in the end, we've got to work with the pakistanis at least as long as i'm involved with this because i

believe it's the right policy as does the administration. this doesn't mean we're without frustrations as reflected in the u.s. "washington post" on the floodses, an area the size of italy, and area that stretches from the canadian border to florida went under water. we were the first country in with the most aid, very visible and popular with the pakistani people. i went into the flood zones, and i'm proud of that, but at the same time we have the issues you alluded to. as far as the con situation on the border goes which is now the kind of the story of the day. let me be very -- let me try to phrase is very presicily. first of all, i don't believe it's going to change the fundamental relationship between our two countries. there were apparently some eventings that ossed the border in an area which as you know because you've been up

there and david spent an involuntary amount of ti up there and walked across it is ill-defined areas that are complicated and very rough terrain. it was very unfortunate, and investigations are going on by nato as it should and the inspector of nato expressed regreet about it, and i echo that, but i don't think it will change the relationship. >> has it actually affected, for instance, a major military point, and that is to allow the roots to be used for nato goods? >> well, right now there was a bigttack on one of the convoys, but it's not clear who did that. there's been other attacks, but the journalist who linked this attack to the events. >> pakistan closed the routes for resupply? >> i believe the routes are not quite closed, but moving more slowly.

>> did that happen? is thats main point then in >> we'll work that out. >> you will? >> we will for sure. it's inconceivable to me the alleged closely which is not a full closing anyway would continue more than a short period of time because if you go to the pass and you look at it from a helicopter for example, you look at that and once they start closing that thing, it's going to have a colossal affect on the region. it's a dangerous area now. >> have you determined that the pakistanis despite the efforts of general and the better relationship between the united states and pakistan and security and cracking down on the home grown threats, have you determined they are not going to go after the haqqani? >> i'll let the pakistanis speak

to their own military plans. this is their business and country, and they have limited resources and many challenges and right now they have like 60-70,000 troops working in the flood area, but having said that, we have all this said that we think more can be done in this regard. >> but it is their issue and your issue because if they are not going after them and they are dlets, then you're going to go after them, the united states? is that what the -- >> i'm not buying into jr. phraseology. that was a nice try. >> it's a direct question. >> and that's a direct answer. i'm getting into that. >> it's a direct nonanswer. >> there's a table you can get on again. [laughter] the first time i met you -- i want to tell the story right now because you are hair rasing me.

[laughter] i came out into a gaggle of presidents and all the generals are yelling and suddenly there's a table in the back, and she appears on top of the table with a camera in her hand and yells the questions and everybody backs off. that was the beginning of -- >> you used to answer the questions. aughter] >> i still do. [laughter] >> you say the taliban are more sophisticated now; is that correct? >> in media terms, sure. ..

>> there are areas of the country where the taliban has pressure but there are other areas for the taliban holds its own and other areas where they make limited inroads but the influx of aitional international troops by the u.s. has made a real difference to create more

space for the effort to push them bath -- back i am not participating. this is not a game. i never would answer that question. it we have a job to do and i am not a light at the end of the 10ost of. >> how would you compa where you are today from one year ago when you started? >> the taliban is under immensely greater pressure than they were and they are feeling it as david petraeus said and i agree. >> there has been a lot of talk weather hot point* states or the afghan government will get into meaningful negotiations with the taliban because most people say there is no full military solution could you

give us a status report of any meaningful resolution with any kind developments from the taliban? >> let me remind you will from the beginning of this administration david petraeus the president, hillary clinton, everybody said there is no pure military solution to this war. what does that mean? eventually some kind of political solution in. president karzai has repeatedly reached out in public including his inaugural speech and a london speech and at the kabul conference in july which hillary clinton and i were asked and many other statements. the terrain not to be very clear to everyone that we understand, everyone undersnds you will not staff at out the taliban but

by military force but the issue how it comes to an end but this is a unique dynamic because of it has continued over 30 years with shift seeing groups not a single group like the bosnian serbs laura vietcong it is all of the group's al qaeda and with whom you cannot negotiate and l.a. t whose goal was to promote conflict and they are all mashed around and they overlap with different goals it is a uniquely complicated problem. having said that of course, the discussions of the basis for the outcome that didn't involve a military solution continues but there is no current current clear path of the

sort you are talking about budget i want to stress to everyone here at this wonderful conference because it is an idea conference and this is a big idea that we're ry mindful that all of us have discussed it seriously and understand its importance and we have been talking to the afghans in pakistan these and others in the region. >> when you say big ideas that negotiated resolution including elements of the taliban. >> i will avoid the word negotiated because that carries duplication of camp david at am i will avoid that. >> why avoid that? even if it is not a full process i believe he will have some kind of deliberation or you will

assume they will buckle and cried uncle and a surrender. which is it? >> there are many other variants. >> tell us some of them. >> [laughter] you want me to? >> please. >> there is a situation remember there are many different elements. >> we are a little confused because many military commanders say this is a good big idea to bring the elements of the taliban who are reconcilable into an end of the conflict but to do that we must first deliver the knockout blow to put them on their heels so they understand they come from a position of weakness to make you answered your own question and laid out the scenario. >> is a possible? >> absolutely. that is why i emphasize its

that is why emphasize their these different enemies out there. there are so many groups i only mention the five biggest. >> also this is a very important idea you have been there many times before with conflict resolution for instance, the original partner of the united states was the northern alliance and of tuleh abdullah was leading that or he was dead by that time i main post 9/11 he led the northern alliance and said th do you really think that the taliban that was committed to obliterating the rights of women and ordinary individuals will negotiate with a government it believes his infidel six cetera so the mine said to i am trying to ask you maybe there are no meaningful

talks going on right now but is there any space for this idea to germinate? >> first of all, there is space for the 80th to terminate. second, your question implies a partial solution. general petraeus and i talk about this a lot because he would do something similar in iraq and there are groups out there which switch allegiances they will fight against foreigners and align themselves with the foreigners in that also happened in iraq although the situation was very different. some of them are defending the valley they have lived in for centuries.

the change restrain it reconcilable a irrencilable start with al qaeda it is not possible to talk with them. and then you go to the other groups to say some of those are splintered internally and some of these people is a constant contact some local taliban calls on the cellphone to those who are a relative in e local area and we're tired of this war. we want to come in from the cold. this is the reintegration program karzai unveiled and we as a british and the panese are finding as a very important program in it is not yet operational and this is that, i don't give me that look. why not? why isn't it operational it has be a long time. >> because the government of

afghanistan has not got to get up and running as it should be. >> , do have? the president put a fix the deadline. >> he has not put a fix to deadlines been a conditions in july 2011. >> do not mistake july 2011 or we will spiral into the wrong place. he saivery clearly that withdrawals will begin on a careful condition the basis. >> it is not a deadline. he said it is the beginning of a drawdown process there is no end date stated it is conditions based relating to the issue that you talk about the back tohe reintegration program, i want to clarify. this is a very important program. nobody can be satisfied with

the current operational levels because we don't have in place or the afghan government in the key areas the people who will implement the program. the project is like everything in afghanistan, it is constrained byhe circumstances of the tragic tormented country. this program like any other we talk about is not where it will ship it should be. and general petraeus, congress, and jane harman who was involved, the congress has authorized the petraeus can use it up to $100 million of his emgency funds to support the program. well the afghan governnt still tries to organize it, but general

petraeus, you were just there, him and his team are putting into place this program at the local level. >> one of the things for some unknown reason s an observer for somebody who has been on the ground in many places, is it nation-building of the term is a dirty word but yet every single general colonel capt. write down to the ground level everybody who has to work in places like bosnia or iraq or afghanistan almost unanimously will say, and maybe they don't use that term but the only way to do this is to really do serious long-term, not just reconstructions but the

alteative economic future of development education all the soft power things that have to happen to win the war. >> of course, i agree. >> how much are your hands tied by the real distance of the success of this administration. >> the previous administration made in this a dirty word specifically from secretary of defense donald rumsfeld. there was an institute for nation building at the army war college and rumsfeld shouted down military believed and that you did not mention the thousands of american civilians and government employees and contractors and ngos a much greater danger because they don't have security and they are on the front line and i want to pay tribute to them because that is part of my program but to get back to the core point* nation-building became a

dirty word because it was spun out in the wrong way. call it what everyone to afghanistan is a nation we're trying to help them rebuild. agriculture is the perfect example. they were the breadbasket and they dominated the world market and exported to their neighbors and wheat and grapes eve been good reselling wine but the vineyards are still there and north of koppel in the planes but that was all destroyed. we can help them do what. it is the highest electricity rates maybe not in the world but one of the highest a massive job but it is not nation-building. they have never had this separatist movements that

exist right now from sudan or even with neighboring pakistan or india. >> some leaders have said to me you ve a country so strategically located with a population that wants the international forces that has aligned itself with progress there wasecurity and economic development and to stand on their own 2 feet and not looking for endless charity or handouts but for the west, that is a totally different to narrative and a mostly muslim country than what it was when al qaeda under the tallyman was but isn't it double and sharp fall and five times more important to really go after what you are involved in? the economic development to

give them an alternative to terrorism and drug production? >> the short answer is yes the more complicated answer is in order to make that work it has to be integrated with other aspects of the policy to include a similar program and pakistan and congress signs the checks and they have legitimate concerns of accountability and transparency and corruption. having said that, i want to be very clear going back to july 2011. president obama and secretary clinton and the rest of us have said repeatedly that there has to be a presence in afghanistan after the combat troo leave because they will e eventually leave. this is not an open-ended commitment as the president has said repeatedly at the west point speech and that goes to your point*.

we cannot repeat the mistake of 1989 when the soviets crossed back and denied the state's immediately turned its back on afghanistan and the country we were so involved anand it just imploded dam broke up them the pakistani is see their own strategic interests were in ball to move 102 stir the very issues we were talking about earlier. to prevent that will require development aid including the issues you have raised. we cannot turn our backs arm them may cannot have that cover photo on "time" magazine become a reality on the ongoing basis the woman with her nose, off. but the headline said what will happen if we lose afghanistan the?

but thehotograph of something happening today so it is a deep part of a culture we cannot change the culture and we're not trying too. >> it is a deep parts of the culture? >> of course. >> that is a criminal act day direct criminal act. >> and a one to get into a long. >> no, no, no you cannot say that is the culture. >> don't miss troopers -- misrepresent what i said. there is a strong culture in afghanistan that you know, what very well what we consider unacceptable and hillary clinton and her colleagues and myself have fought very strongly. let me finish he may very serious misrepresentation of what i said. there is a strong culture. >> an equally strong of women trying to fight back. i am not saying you are

trying to let that happen. >> i am not condoning these i have committed my life to fighting them and so has hillary clinton but i am making a point* we don't want it to happen again but it happens even now not just the taliban who do it is part of an ancient culture it does not just happened in afghanistan. >> one more minute. >> i have to finish the core point* after the troops leave and we must remain with economic and social development to prevent this kind of thing from happening and continue to train the afghan police and army. that was not the cheap with an international effort to. that goes to your question

abt nation-building. >> we do have one last question going to the culture you said at the beginning, success depending on how people defiant act, a lot of people say we promised to bring democracy, this and that but we can because of their culture they are not disposed to its. do you think people in the west get the wrong idea that democracy should be a western-style democracy or nothing at all? what is success for you? >> i would define success as a country th is at peace and in which its government, i don't just mean kabul because afghanistan historically has not been run entirely by the center because of the lack of communication and ethnic

groups but a country that is stable enough to work on its ecomic development and build its institutions to give people literacy which is critically important because illitery is the greatest gift of the taliban. and to rebuild the institutions that has an understanding with islamabad so the two neighbors with the overlapping strategic interest and live together with some degree of harmony. we will nevehave good day where it will be violence free. like many other countries there will be residual movements subplots, tribal driven they will keep fighting, but to get it out of the world arena but continue is not an easy task. i don't want anyone to be misled. it will not be easy to do

but that is part of the process. but the collor goal reins to defend our national security on the ground and in the region because the people in that region attack the united states the times square bomber went back to the border area to get

he has amassed the greatest oral history of what happened in katrina and what has happened in the five-year cents. it is an ongoing project. what he has done is document this transformative moment in american history, hurricane

katrina. we are also going to talk about the second event, the beat the spill which spike deals with in his latest hbo documentary. spike, can you come on out? [applause] we wanted to begin a little bit -- we mainly wanted to talk about bp because it is more recent history. with the hurricane, you get to interview some many people. out of all the people you talk to, who would you like to call out? >> there are many people. i was in venice for a film festival when the hurricane hit. leaving new york for the

festival, i forgot about this on coming hurricane. she woke me up and called me from new york and said to turn on the tv. i saw all these horrific images of americans in an american city calling out for help. they were on the rooftops. when you are in venice, you do not want to stay in your hotel room. it is a great city. i did not leave the hotel room. i was taught by the television. i decided i wanted to make this film. our first day of shooting was not until the day after thanksgiving because new orleans had closed down. our first interview was with the woman who became the voice of peace. >> what has she done since the

storm? >> she is one of the co-stars of "tremaine" now. >> how did you find her? >> we started shooting in new york. there were 500 people who came to new york from new orleans. they were in hotels near john f. kennedy airport. >> i am going to run some names of past due -- big players in that drama. let me know your honest feeling about them. president bush. >> that is going to go on his tombstone. it is not good. >> what will it say on his tombstone? >> well, it is just not good. i know he has a more coming out. it would try to do some revisionist history.

the administration, they just -- people are dead now because they did not do what they needed to do. when the tsunami hit scirocco, -- sri lanka, we were there two days later. that was around the world. no one has explained from the bush and administration except for michael brown why it took five days for the united states government to come to the help of its own citizens. it is the continental united states of america. louisiana, alabama, and mississippi are attached to the united states of america. five days and people are dead. lives were changed forever. the united states government did

not come to the aid of its own citizens. >> what about michael brown of fema? >> all along, i had the feeling that michael brown was a scapegoat and the real villain was chertoff. i ran into him on the street in new york. he said why did you not put me in your movie? >he said if we did another one he wanted to be in it. he did an interview. he tells why it took five days for the government to show up. to me, i think it is a burden of the tisch shoulders. he was the face of fema, but he was not the one making the decisions. chertoff was the guy. >> which brings us to chertoff.

what you think of his performance? the head of homeland security. >> people are dead now because he did not do his job. he was ill-equipped to do the job. there are certain positions -- i know you have cronyism and you give your friends' jobs, but do not put them in a position where people's lives depend on them. fema? they are playing with people's lives. as i said before, people are dead. another thing is that a number of people died, but the number is twice that. there are people who died after. they were all of their medication. a lot of stuff happened. they committed suicide. there are a whole lot of ramifications because of that.

it makes the death toll that much bigger. >> they have a 48 hour window. if you do not get to somebody in 48 hours, the chances of unnecessary debt are very real. heart attacks, stroke, peabody their medication, people need the respirators. why are you so high on general ra? >> he was one of the true heroes. i hope it will come out one day why thad allen was put in charge of the oil spill. honoree was not used at all. he was retired like that allen. thad allen.

it was a great mistake to not include him in this whole bp thing. >> you called your first hbo documentary, which everybody said was a masterpiece -- it is a heavy word is overused, but it surely is a masterpiece. how did you get the idea to call it "when the levees broke?" you think the army corps of engineers or something to the city of new orleans. >> there was a big court case where, finally, the army corps of engineers were held liable. but it is not just new orleans. the levees around america are crumbling. there was something on the news the other day about another levee in peril. sacramento's let the system is shaky. it is not just new orleans.

this will happen in other cities around america and i thank they need to overhaul the army corps of engineers. what they had done since katrina is still not safe. we were there for a month and there was still a crack in the wall. i do not know what they're arguing. >> some people ask the question about race and katrina. some say that if this had happened in cape cod, defense would have been in their center. do you still racism played any part in the slow response? >> i think so. i think condoleezza rice says otherwise, but i think it is class, too. you and i both know with anderson cooper that this whole

oil spill could have happened on the beaches of nantucket, martha's vineyard, the hamptons. it would have been a much quicker response. it is not just race, it is class. the people in those communities, if there is oil in the hamptons, martha vineyard, nantucket -- there will be hell to pay. it is ray's. it is politics. -- it is race, politics, and class. >> we were having breakfast right before this. spite was telling me is very irritated. every day you have probably seen the bp as in the newspaper. >> i cannot watch a football

game without watching the advertisements. my question is how much money is bp spending on these full-page ads in "usa today" and "the new york times?" there are people who still have not received their claims. why do you not stopped this in the game? we get the point. you're going to make it right. stop using the money with these full-page advertisements. this is not a local. this is a national paper. on sunday with the nfl, you'll see the commercial run eight times. this is big money they are spending. at the same time, they are trying to fight paying this $20

billion and put it on transatlantic and halliburton. stop spending money on the ads. give the money to people who have still not receive their claims. >> "if god is willing and the creek don't rise" you are hard on bp. what shocks you about bp and the oil industry in general? we talked about it at practice. >> yet to realize something about the second documentary. we visited new orleans and the gulf states to see what had transpired five years since august 29. we were done shooting before april 20. blew up, that changed everything. we were done shooting. we had to make eight more trips

down to the gulf region. this is four hours, too. the last hour is about bp. the last hour will be on the dv . as an extra the biggest eye opener for me is how powerful the oil and gas companies are. oil and gas is the most powerful company on the planet. bp is dictated to the united states of america how things would be run. they dictated. they dictated. they told the faa to not let anybody fly over. they tell the coast guard to not let anybody bring boats. they would not let the press in. the whole thing was dictated by

bp in my opinion. i think they were the ones that hand-pick thad allen. i think general honoree would have told the be and where to go. he would have said that we were running this, not you. i do not believe that 75% of the oil disappeared. that was a lie. it came from the government. this oil spill was the biggest oil spill in the history of the world. two days after you cap it, abracadabra, 75% of the oil has disappeared? i am not buying it. it is a lie. >> who is applying and why would they make that up? -- who is lying and why would

they make that up? >> the american people or gullible. if you tell the american people a live long enough they are going to believe it. eventually people get off of this a louisiana oil spill fang and go on to something else. they can go back and make their record profits. the stock that that bank in alaska. >> we were talking earlier -- shell oil is beginning to drill offshore at the arctic national wildlife reach. it is going to be this spring. the president is going to be getting this bp spill commission report in january. president obama will have a tough choice whether to tell shell no, you can not do

offshore drilling. the refuge is celebrating its 50th anniversary this year. keep your eye on this big showdown in alaska that is going to take place probably in february or march. the bp still proved that offshore drilling is not safe. if they say no, the government is 20 that to pay some billions back to shell. the arctic refuge has become a sticking point for the environmental community. i think it is going to become a very big story in february or march after that comes in.

are you feeling we are living in the age of oil and oil is a currency? does it worry you that the oil lobby has too much power? >> it worries me, but were maurice me more is mocked -- but what worries me more is our addiction to fossil fuel. before this film, i was not thinking green. i would leave lights on. i was not recycling. i did not think it made a difference. i turn lights off like crazy now. i recycle. we have to get off of this addiction to fossil fuel. that is something that, hopefully, americans will really start being more focused on. >> we are winding down our time. i have one last question.

president obama is a huge admirer of your work. i believe he went on his first date with michele to go see "do the right thing." you have been part of the obama's life for a while. how you feel about president obama now? we have a midterm election coming up? what you make of the tea party movement? >> the president is in a rough spot right now. i have not deserted him. he still has my support. he will have to work hard to get a second term. i will be there to support him, -- here is the thing it comes down to. i think this is a good way to end this thing. one out of seven americans are in poverty today.

the unemployment rate is almost 10. it is 10, and as to what it is for people of color. you may be able to double that. people are hurting. they do not have jobs. they have lost their houses. many are destitute. i do not know of one person who can turn this around in two years, but something has to be done. people are hurting. we are hurting. we have to get out at it. to me, the t baggers or fanatics. i think eventually they will be exposed for who they are.

but we have to turn this around -- this economy. >> thank you so much, spike. [applause] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] >> congress passed a law. the law said that anyone who lost a family on 9/11 could file a claim, but they would give up their right to file a lawsuit.

people have to voluntary give up their rights to sue. the bank is going to receive more money than the firemen or the policeman. that is the american system of compensation. >> what about a military person getting far less than a banker did in the world trade center? >> that is exactly right. that is the -- that is why the law creating the 9/11 fund will never be replicated. it was an unprecedented response. >> did you feel that our law system was right? >> absolutely. i think it was the right thing to do. i think the congress and the 9/11 victim compensation fund was a good idea. it was appropriate, just do not do it again. >> do you think our legal system or the law should value the

fireman's writes? >> that would change 200 years of history. everyday in courts throughout this country, firemen who were injured on the job or somebody who falls off a ladder to is a waiter or a bus boy, it gets far less from the damaged than a banker or a stock broker. that is the economic lot. that is the system that is ingrained in the rules law in this country since it was founded. virginia tech was private money, not taxpayer money. there were no restrictions on how to design the program. there, i concluded, whether you're a student or a faculty member, everybody who died should be valued equally. i could do that in virginia tech

because there was no statute or no taxpayer funds involved. >> if you had no statute involved in 9/11, which you have made everything equal? >> do not tie it to the system. pay everybody the same and let them do with the money what they will. that is not what congress said in that statute. >> if you were to do it again, which you try to change the statute? >> yes. the careful about doing it again. you should read some of the e- mail's i have received. mr. feinberg, my husband died after he saved three little girls from drowning in the mississippi river. where is my money? my daughter died in the first

world trade center attack committed by the same people in 1993. my sister died in oklahoma city. where is my money? >> we did not do it for oklahoma city. we did not do it for katrina. why did we do it for 911. virginia tech is private. >> it was not random and it was not a mistake. you cannot justify these compensation programs from the perspective of the victim. i do not have a very good answer as to why a 9/11 betim gets paid and an oklahoma city big dumb does not with public money. but from the perspective of the american people and the congress, their elected representatives, i think 9/11 was special. i think congress felt they wanted to show their solidarity and compassion for the victims of 9/11.

so from the perspective of american society, not from the perspective of the victims, i can see a justification. >> the times we had done its sense have been semi-private. virginia tech and ldp, which is semi private. >> i do not know why it is and my private. it is private private. the united states government and bp entered into a private compact to create a $20 billion fund, totally bp money, to pay claims in the gulf. it is not quasi-private. it is private. >> you do not have restrictions on you? >> no. i do not have tort law restrictions. i am trying to take advantage of my understanding of current law as to who is eligible in the gulf to get paid and how much

they should get paid and i use that as a basis to try and design a system that will treat people fairly. it is not easy. >> it would seem almost impossible. what about the guy in boise, idaho? >> i cannot get shrimp from the gulf, so my restaurant in boise is losing money because i cannot serve shrimp. >> and you say? >> if you are so far away from the gulf and you can get trapped elsewhere. spare me. [laughter] >> what about the shoe salesman in biloxi, mississippi. >> that is tupper. mr. feinberg, i am a shoe salesman in biloxi, mississippi. the fisherman who i sell issues and to are not coming in.

now my business is off. i am right on the beach. pay me. i am inclined to pay that person. even if you are eligible, you have to document your loss. that is a serious problem in the gulf. i have paid 50,000 claims so far. there are about 25,000 claims that i am is sitting on it where there is no documentation. i am in a fisherman and i have lost wages because i cannot fish. pay me. there is no documented loss. there is no proof. so if you ask a fisherman, where is your proof? where is your tax return? >> i lost my tax return. you have to come up with some way to document the loss. >> what if you are an undocumented alien? >> under the federal law

concerning the federal pollution-control act, that is not a barrier to compensation. >> people are not documented but they have to bring documentation to you? >> they have to bring the evidence of damage -- a financial documentation. >> are you getting any push back because you are giving money to illegal aliens? >> first of all, there are not that many. second of all i have not had any push back. >> what about an underground economy like prostitution? [laughter] >> i do not have any of those claims. [laughter] you read about the strip joints in your lens. they wanted compensation. we did not pay them. they are for away from the gulf. they are not sufficiently related to the natural resources of the gulf.

>> i am not going to go there. we have haley barbour coming up. he would object to this part. i do not get it, you make a moral distinction between what these people are doing and whether or not they are valuable or not? >> it is not about their value. it is not a moral restriction. i think you have to draw some boundaries. which claims are sufficiently related to the tragedy in the gulf to justify, -- justify compensation? i have said over and over again that i am in doing what most of the people in this room pop would do. it is not rocket science. you do the best you can.

>> what did you do in 9/11 that help you figure out bp. >> the one thing you learn is hell diverse human nature is. these programs are so rare in american life. people come to see me angry, disappointed, frustrated, cynical, skeptical, wishful. you have to listen and you have to hear their plight. if at all possible you try to help. there has to be some boundaries, otherwise it is just a grab-bag. it is just a giveaway. >> there are no clear boundaries. tell me about "solomon's choices appear ">> you have to make some distinctions as to how much people should receive and how much they should receive. i talked extensively about close

calls about whether a person should be paid and how much they should be paid and what they should be told about the pavement. it can become very, very taxing on anybody. >> you said the one thing you learned never to say is, "i know how you feel." >> never tell someone who lost a loved one on 9/11 or had their business wiped out in the gulf of mexico by the spill, i am going to give you a check. do not worry. i know how you feel. you do not know how they feel. you cannot begin to know how they feel. you just do the best you can under the statute or the program that has been set up. be careful how you express or empathy. these are very believable citizens. >> how you express it? >> mr. jones, i have a job to

do. i appreciate what you are requesting. i understand that the program that has been established. i cannot help you. i wish i could. i cannot. i can only do what i can do under this program. that is the best anybody can do. >> the most heartbreaking thing on the 9/11 was when i called the 11 families. explain that. >> it is an amazing thing. i learned about grief. here are 11 families who were eligible to get about $2 million each tax-free under the program. they were so paralyzed by grief they could not sign the forms. they did not take the money. the program expired. i went to see one lady and said, "you can get $2 million for the loss of your son." she said to the the application

on the kitchen table. i am not here to talk about money, i lost my son. she never filed. she never filed a lawsuit either. she just gave up the money. it was amazing. >> 11 families gave up $2 million because they could not sign the forms. >> it was less than 11. >> did you go to people and ask them to do this? >> go to them? we went to family members. i felt like hitting some people over the head with a baseball bat. do not let this program expire when the congress and american people are willing to get you millions of dollars. set up a foundation in your loved one's name. do something with the money. do not like grief so paralyzed you that you do not take advantage of the program. we turned some people around. there were a couple that did not take the money. that is why these programs -- look at this from a

philosophical point of view -- these programs should be rarely designed and a implemented. the american people frown, i think, on special treatment for certain groups of victims of life's misfortunes. curveballs are toned people every day. setting up these programs and try to carve out special compensation for these people but not for these people, that is a slippery slope. i do not advise it except in the rare step cases. >> your job is to try to apply the concept of fairness. i think your old boss once said -- >> i do the best i can in applying fairness. the most important thing for these programs is to make sure similar people are treated

similarly. everybody tells everybody else's money. it is very important that you achieved relative consistency, but in terms of absolute fairness, i leave that to philosophers. >> speaking of the wholesophers, john rawls concept was "justice as fairness." do you subscribe to a moral philosophy like that or are you just a practical guide? do you reach back to the philosophers? >> i tried to apply the concept of fairness. >> have you define the concept of fairness? >> i just tried to. what i do in this narrow niche i am involved in is trying to make sure that in the confines of eligibility, similar people are treated the same way.

the problem i run into and the problem that policy makers run into is how to decide when a tragedy justifies this type of special compensation that is not fairly available to everybody who is a victim through no fault of their own. that is the great tension in these programs. >> if you or your favorite moral philosophers? >> i knew you would throw something at me like that. i do not know. i suppose i should go back and read my notes from college. i could throw out a name -- aristotle. [laughter] table. -- hegel. [laughter] >> the concept that fairness --

what would you choose if you did not know what position you would be in? do you ever go back to deeper principles and say, "i just have to apply the rules of." >> the rules always wisely lead discretion to do the right, fair thing. what guides you is probably a menu or a recipe that consists of what the statute says. what does it leave open in the way of discretion? what was the intention in setting up the program? how can we apply principles whether you are rich or poor, a fisherman, you own a home, had you try to design a system that

will be perceived by most as a relatively fair and make sure it is apolitical. it must be apolitical. these programs cannot be polarizing. these are not republican, democrat, a left-wing, right- wing -- these programs have nothing to do with that. my best friend in administering these programs have been people like haley barbour, governor riley, gov. chris -- different political parties try to help me do the right thing. >> what principles we try to apply to the tarp program? >> congress again passed a law and the law said that secretary got there, who is extremely supportive of this, delegated to me the authority to set the pay for the top officials in the seven companies to see the most

taxpayer assistance. we looked at the seven companies and decided that the pay was all out of whack and that we should, the government's, should set the pay. >> is executive compensation out of whack? >> yes pitches out of whack. >> a teacher to teach is better than another teacher at best makes 5% more. a bond trader gets 1000 times more. >> merit pay. when i met with these wall street executives, i would say to them, "we are going to reduce your paper acquired -- we are

going to reduce or pay." they would say that you cannot do that. they said their workers would get to the competition. they said their company would lose a key people and they would all go to china. everybody's going to work in china. or everybody is going to work in europe. it was an argument that i thought was dubious and i still think it is dubious. most of those people are still working for the same company. >> should we have an alternative that is more robust? >> i do not think so. what we have learned over the years about the legal system in this country is how ingrained it is in the heritage and history of the country. this idea that we can develop a better dispute resolution model than the adversarial system in the court room with chiles --

with trials in the courtroom, theoretically it might be a good idea. but each file system is part of a fabric of the company -- of the country that although it makes sense, i do not think it will replace the common-law legal system in our country. >> should we have used the legal system for 9/11? >> no. the 9/11 program was a marvel, i think, of a unique alternative to an unprecedented tragedy, but do not read too much into that model. it worked in that case, but i do not think it should be replicated. >> any questions? raise your hand and shout it out. we will make it informal. yes? >> [unintelligible]

>> i suppose there are lessons with medicare. the problem with the drawing lessons from these unique finds that in minister, ask yourself two questions. one, who is going to pay for the funds that you want to create and how much is going to be allocated to each eligible claimants. medicare -- i suppose there are alternative dispute mechanisms you contract into the medicare programs. for all i know there is a dispute mechanism in the program. but it is not something that could overnight we define the entire system. i do not think that is likely. >> i think perhaps one angle to that question is you are valuing

a right. -- you are valuing a life by deciding what kind of treatment they are going to get. if you can take it from valuing -- ife to giv >> it is tough to value a life. to take the 9/11 program or something like it and try to decide what a life is worth as you age or suffer from a terminal illness or whatever, you talk about eight philosophic debate and eight real debate over how society should approach the less fortunate. that would require, i think, more than the 9/11 fund. that would require redefining

how america approaches the value of human beings as they get older. that is not on my caseload. >> kenneth feinberg, thank you very much. [laughter] [applause] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] eric schmidt is the chairman and ceo of do. -- of google.

among your roles, you sit on the president's council of the advisers of technology. what do you think washington does not understand? >> i would enter the question as a the average american does not realize how much talos are written by lobbyists. -- how much the walls or written by lobbyists. -- how much the laws are written by lobbyists. it is obvious that if the system -- it is obvious that the people will benefit by the laws that are written. >> what is the effect on the economy? >> it perpetuates the current incumbents whoever they are. they are the classic power

structure here in washington. it's shocking to me how hard it is to take on any encumbrance in washington. >> bugle is one of the greatest and, and corporations in america. >> perhaps, but we do not write .he laws >> >> how to restructure the system? if washington is essentially an incumbent protection machine, what would you do to change that? >> one of the things about technology is that it is fundamentally destructive. my experience is that people are shocked at hal real destruction occurs and how much change can occur through empowerment and technology. we are at a point now in

technology where we really can change the discourse if we want to. an example would be that everybody here has a mobile phone. you may have more than one. the fact is that in washington, people write lots of reports, but they do not test them. with a mobile phone, you can just ask everyone. you might be surprised as to what people actually do versus what they say they do. it's the first rule of the internet. you can completely change the way government works. another example would be that there are large numbers of well- meaning groups that produced lots of reports that people do not actually read. you can use that as a scoring method as to whether you should listen to them or not.

it can ultimately decide that people do not read anything important. i am not try to pass judgment. another example, i was part of proposing the a r a recovery act. it could have easily been written in a different way. wicket iterate best on the best impact against these measurements. that is not how the law was written. it was written for the incumbency's to help break the law. again, if you think -- it the government's job is to allocate taxes and spread money around for good deeds, what do we not take a look at what is happening?

>> if you talk a bit about what you have seen as witnesses in the american economic system relative to the chinese system in the way we practice our businesses. you said that we have a problem taking ideas and world-class research and turning it into a business. do you think there is some sign that the american model is actually slipping behind? >> two separate data points. first, american research universities are the envy of the world. we had the top research universities in the united states. let's get some credit for government expenditures. the spending helped create the modern research university after

world war ii. the internet was created essentially at of the defense department. all of the investments pay off now, but we have literally 90% or 95% research universities in the united states. there are errors in our strategy. we have a policy where we will train people in the university's and then kick them out, but we will not give them visas. it does not make sense at all. about china. china can best be understood as a well-run large business. china has roughly the following objectives -- it was to maximize its cash flow and it wants to maximize its import demand as well as export demand. the entire country seems to be organized around that principle. if you look at all of the new

businesses in china they can be understood as a focus of business expansion. the chinese thought renewable energy was important. they now control 80% of solar panels. we have that choice five or 10 years ago as a country. realistically, that would have never done to our political and social markets. nobody in america could get away with organizing a industrial policy to dominate this section of this part of an important new industry. yet that is exactly what china did. by the way, all of that technology was invented in america. similar stories occurred in south korea and singapore. there is a different industrial model that creates a high-tech manufacturing jobs. we are losing their jobs. one more thing. i will give you some more data. we have been looking at this

question of manufacturing. i believe that america needs a manufacturing base to create high-quality jobs. the vast majority of global companies have their manufacturing outside the united states because they can and then the technology in america and making it the same quality manufacturing in other countries as well. >> that is a policy-making problem. the chinese are not exactly embracing destruction. that is not the key to their success. it is a long-term consistent industrial policy. is the problem too much change and instability in the business environment? if you do not know what the tax system will be? what is it from the policy- making perspective that needs to change to achieve the industrial

policy you are describing? >> the american business committee disagrees on a lot of the answers to these questions. they all agree on consistency rather than constant change. one of the jokes is that one of the best things to do is to have the government be distracted by other things. business takes a longer-term view of the fiscal process. there is some evidence that i indycar recession, the lack of long-term capital investments, companies are hoarding cash for all sorts of reasons. that is one the criticisms of the obama administration. it is probably true in all administrations as well. the chinese model can be understood as classic industrial policy in creating new industries. that is destructive, but it is very unfamiliar to the american

model. the american model is more entrepreneurial. it creates great industries. we have to embrace the one we are good at. >> stick and the president, you are a supporter of barack obama. mayor bloomberg was here yesterday -- yesterday and took a shot at president obama. he said he was a liberal guy, pro-union, not particularly interested in business. i respond to that? >> my experience with the president is that he is very interested in these things. the criticisms have a lot to do with tone. if you look at the criticisms of the obama administration, they extraordinarily quickly moved into take over and control and regulate the financial system in such a way that it provided the

capital so businesses could continue operation. it could have been much worse. my reading of the criticisms, speaking as a supporter, it is mostly about finality and so forth. some people say we need more business executives in the cabinet. would it not be better to have the best people in the cabinet and not worry about where they came from? >> i want to ask you one specific intervention that this administration may into the economy and that is the auto makers. the ec that as a class influence of the government protecting a company rather than allowing a major sector to be disrupted by competitors or do you think it was a justified move? >> if you remove the arguments, my personal view is that you would not have intervened in any

of these and would have allowed them to work it out. to properly of punch in the bankruptcy laws, the firms would have been able to continue to operate. the would have been an of capital. there are several reasons it did not occur. there's the feeling that the bankruptcy structure would not fundamentally have survived. he would have been too much damage. there is a lot of truth to that. the invention in the financial markets, a i see it for example -- aig, for example, i think the judge should be whether the government makes money. we should have a long debate as to whether we want to have this incentive. my personal view would be that we try to avoid it at all costs. will we get into these "too big to fail" kind of industries, we

make them not too big to fail. do not confuse yourself. if the company is too big to fail, why is it not a government entity? in any government incentives drive -- you can understand that the product of washington is incentives. the politicians use the incentives they have to get reelected. it is true in business as well. >> let me ask you about your own business. we had on our tech channel an interesting interview yesterday with your chief. he said, "and now you google things on your computer.

i think there will be an m plants created within 10 years." >> did he ask you if you're the first of volunteer? >> he seemed eager to acquire one of these. he did say he was not sure if anybody inside the company was actually working on this yet. maybe you could tell us. >> we are a completely bottoms- up company. >> is this a realistic prospect in 10 years? do you understand why it kind of creeps people out a little bit? [laughter] >> the policy is to get right up to the creepy-line but not across its [laughter] . . [laughter] [laughter]