that doesn't coalesce in some of the conversations about immigration. he's smart in realizing the demographics are changing. he's going to have a challenge doing that particularly with his notion of never criticizing another republican. at some point, if he were the rnc chair. he would have to look at these differences. >> what does the party have to look forward to in 2012? it will be a presidential race, we don't know how many candidates will be in the field. just give us an overall handicap of what 2012 looks like for this group and the parties? >> there's a poll out that shows

barack obama is in trouble. >> what about democrats in that? >> among democrat, 46% say they want him challenged in a primary. those are both troubling signs for an incumbent heading back into a cycle. other polls show is wide up. mit romney is also in there. we polled i think 11 names. any one of them could win that nomination. >> is the wild card? >> the wild card and the trump card. there have been a couple hints of positive economic numbers this past week even. if that were to continue, i would suspect barack obama's fortunes would change. aside from the polling numbers and the challenges, democrats

and the incumbent president would in 2012. the nature of campaigning is changing. we have to become accustomed to these rapid swings in public opinion. and we see campaigning year round. having groups that will raise provocative issue and campaign slogan challenges to incumbents. >> what do you think that means for voter turn out? >> we heard a lot of young voters say they were turned off. is it going to be positive? >> i think youth will come back. i think that will come back. depends in part on who the republican nominee is.

sarah palin will appeal. but they may turn out against here. i'm not sure they're going to be as energized? >> are you suspecting sarah palin is going to run? >> it's a very different way of strategy. i have talked to other campaigns. they don't know how to navigate that because it's so different. that's not the rules they have played by. it may not work. but if it does, we will write new books >> well thanks to you both for being with us this week. >> today at 6:30 p.m., speak mike huckabee. the former republican presidential candidate talks about the mid-term elections. >> it was a historic election,

not for iowa but for all the country. as we watched the goings ones. it proved true and there was a strong push back against the conservatives of the state of iowa, and the judges had been retain as a way of saying they could do anything they want, there will never be a penalty for ignoring the people. it would be a devastating blow to conservative consist christians and other people of value conscious in the public square. it would have had disasterous consequences beyond the border of iowa. the fact that the election went the other way was so significant

and the most important election that happened in america, because it set the stage in every other state that those who are governing will be accountable to the government. that is a message that every american needs to be remembered and reminded of. i'm here to say thank you to every pastor who had the guts to stand out his pulpit. every mom, every dad. every person that walked neighborhoods and made phone calls and made it happen. you are to be commended. you did a great work for america. thank you and god bless you. >> former arkansas governor, mike huckabee. 6:30 p.m. eastern on c-span.

earlier this month, the bipartisan held discussions at tulane on bipartisanship. presidential advisors on both parties spoke about issues such as katrina. >> before we get to our last panel, i want to say thanks again to tulane for providing the forum. thanks to all the panelists who have been spectacular. just nobody phoned it in. thank you. you have been great. [applause]

>> blessed to have so many wonderful friends and thank you bipartisan policy center. i think the democracy project was really important. we are actually doing something. you young people are thinking about how you can help. that's my final thanks. you young people were very impressive. we are feeling a lot better about everything. you're asking the right questions and very smart ones. thank you very much. it makes us all so proud. the crisis of politics or crisis politics or is the last panel. however you want to put that. which caps off the day's discussions, all of them, about the various lamentations about the impedament to the

furtherance of democracy. i was interested to hear the most quoted person today was mark twain. we have been going through these lamentations for quite a long time. we always get through them. there's a reason because we don't just love our country, but democracy and freedom. we love your participating in the continuing furtherance, i turn you over to my best bipartisan friend for a final introduction. [applause] >> thank you. and this is our final panel, and boy, just everybody, all the sponsors of bipartisan coalition, we want to thank them and all the students that came out for this. this is a very good things for us to have. we are always delighted to show

our city off. this is the right time to have our people here. the governor and mayor out there. i am going to introduce the next speaker. a little bit of the college professor in me. i'm going to use this as a teaching moment. it's important to realize that we have our august 29, 2005, and st. bernard parish was a failure. we didn't call it a natural disaster. that's an "n" word. however, what happened on the mississippi gulf coast was more devastating and a disaster on the first magnitude. understand the physics of a hurricane. the last place you want to be is

on the eastern side the eye. so the force that hit mississippi was is significantly larger than the force that hit louisiana. and i, my wife and i drove to biloxi. there was not a pre-2005 building that exists. it was that devastating. our next speaker, as i a child of the gulf coast, of the mississippi gulf coast. after this happened, refused to be silent ask spoke out for what happened to her place. she grew up in bay st. louis and went to university of mississippi. i hope brett hasn't texted you

any pictures. [laughter] >> i thought that the democratic party or the dallas cowboys would team up on how to win. >> kathleen, distinguished herself in journalism and distinguished herself for her passion at advocacy for the the region she dearly loves. she has received numerous awards. written a book," rising from katrina", which documents what happened. it's very important people understand what happened in here. what happened in st. bernard parish and what happened in

harrison and hancock county. there's a lot of this information out. she's going to talk about something she's schooled in. crisis management. i will let her introduce what is one of really distinguished panels we have. again, i just want to really thank the bipartisan community and the students of tulane and loyola. i am going to turn this over to you after this teaching moment >> thank you. i appreciate that so much. i know we do have residents of louisiana and mississippi in the audience. that's an important thing for all of us to make that distinction as far as what happened on august 29th. immediately to my left. lanny davis from 1996 to 1998.

served as special counsel to president clinton. he was a spokesman on finance. served three terms on the democratic national committee. in 2005 appointed to serve on the privatacy and over sight board. hillary is a strategist. regarded as one of most influential executives of the industry. also. rock the vote and many democratic candidates. dan has been introduced. is distinguished career in politics. worth mentioning twice. dan served in high-ranking

positions if are george bush in july 2, ' july 2007. currently president and c.e.o. of public strategy. paul, probably needs no introduction to many of you in the room. paul is a democratic strategist. paul helped to elect numerous. local, and state candidates. and most famously for bill clinton in 1992 with our co-host today. james. finally, congressman joseph cow. the first vietnam native to serve in the u.s. congress.

representing louisiana since 2009. has better perspective than most on last week's election since he has been voted out of office. speaking of katrina, lost both his homes and office in the hurricane five years ago. thank you all for joining us. and, as james mentioned. i covered katrina. standing there in the rubble of what was left in the middle of the worst natural disaster in the united states in modern history. partisan politics was the furthere farthest things from my mind. i would like to talk about first of all, let's look at the worst case scenarios.

when you look at recent crisis. in the perfect world, we get along. hold hands and come together for the good of our country and fellow citizens. that doesn't always happen. when you look back to recent years, when has it fallen on its face and what happened? >> you know, i think the truth is, we have a good record of america pulling together in getting beyond partisanship when we truly face a crisis. george bush, who i didn't support politically, but gave a great speech on 9/11 before a joint session of congress. we were all democrats and republicans that night. while katrina was a terrible tragedy and there was a finger

pointed whether he responded fast enough. there was no red and blue states. our hearts broke as we watched cnn. those awful scenes and president clinton, after oklahoma city pulled the city together. this country has a history of forgetting about partisanship when it really matters. unfortunately, the focus on scandal as a political weapon, and the focus on using investigations or god help us, if we have an independent council again. the misuse of that constitutional monster which antho anthony scalia predicted. they misused the system and george bush won, and a number of

people were innocent victims of the democratic scandal machine. >> wouldn't you say, have we always gotten it right. >> i sort the remember katrina different. i think president bush was classic. you know, i all, a couple of us do pr. a classic pr crisis is the first thing you do is, you have leadership. right. it's the c.e.o. and churches getting out there. c.e.o. leaves. get people involved and transparency with the press. george bush of course a classic leader after 9/11.

i sort of remember katrina a little differently. i don't remember democratic being as friendly. i think by that time, people were angry about the war. the parties were much more divided. there was a much more bipartisan. we weren't willing to give the president bush the benefit of doubt. what we were hearing from local folks, the response wasn't good enough. you could see it. aggressively and obviously on tv, i think we piled on a lot. and used it a lot against the president. >> and dan, did that hinder what you were trying to accomplish at all? >> sure. your instinct is to fight back. unfortunately, we probably spent too much time fighting. >> instead of getting him down there.

>> you let preconceived notions take hold. >> you go to those default positions. i think hillary is right. the difference between 9/11, the conduct and president bush has been very candid. he made serious mistakes with responding to katrina. there was water under the bridge. 2002-2004 election, the environment didn't give a lot of the benefit of the doubt. i remember donna brazil from the public world. stood up and came to the white house and said, what can i do to help? there was a lot of facts of bipartisanship. this rallying affect is getting

so the shorter and shorter last cycle. it doesn't endure as it used to. that's a concern. we have been able as a country, when we come together, those period that is we actually see good governance. and the financial crisis, you saw the two parties come together. probably reluctantly and both got punished at the polls. that will again, give pause to politicians, am i going to get rewarded or punished? >> neil that ran the tarp program for seven months, told us in the depth of the crisis. i saw washington at its finest. i saw democratic and republican leaders coming together and absolutely necessary for the sake of our country and the

american people. i have seen washington work, and i know it can work. at least at times of crisis. i hope we can make it work at other times as well. it sounds fine and noble. paul, what is the lesson? with so many heads having rolled. will people be reluctant? >> i hope so. not to be the skunk of the party. we want to lay down our words. the most patriotic thing you can do is dissent. i wish republicans would have been more partisan where it was a good idea to lockup all americans. that's great. let's discriminate and put them

in concentration camps. that's one of the darkest moments. i think it was poorly constructed and rushed. let's get back to katrina. this was a moment when there was a disconnect in the different roles that people play. a democratic in a republican-controlled senate. they were doing their best it help the state and your state and the rest of the region. she said so. the evil republicans won't help my state. she went on cnn. anderson cooper interviewed her. she said. i want to thank the republican senator and the appropriations. they are really coming through our state. there are dead bodies he's

stepping over. his job is to keep them honest. she's doing her job. working the bipartisan way. he's doing his job to cry bs. nobody cares the region is being ignored we will piece it out. it's enormously complicated to know when the best thing to put up your hands and say no. $750 billion with not enough control or oversight wasn't a good idea >> as it turns out. it's only 50 billion and the taxpayers will make up money on the deal. >> alls well that ends well >> it's hard to know. i can't say the best thing in a crisis is to piss and moan as a partisan. i think it's more complicated.

>> congressman, we were talking about katrina in the middle of all this. you were here. what is your opinion, from your perspective, did the parties get it right? was there enough bipartisanship to get the people of louisiana and mississippi what they needed at that dire time? >> well, i would like to compare it with the b.p. oil spill. when i lived through katrina, i believe the administration, everyone wanted to help people. they were people hurt. things needed to be done. they were, they come together to help the people down here and see the same things in regard to the oil spill. but because they were, i guess they were positions being push and pull within the different parties. for example, during katrina, the

democrats wanted to take punches at republicans in order to take control of the congress, also, you can see similarly during the b.p. oil spill, you have republicans taking punches at the president in order to get the political point to get back to power. that's where i saw the partisanship come into play. the issue is not whether or not we want to help people. everyone wants -- we all wanted it help people. at the same time, we were pulling punches to get political points to paint the other side it look bad in order to convince people that we could have done a better job >> you and i were discussing what happens when a president at a time of national crisis takes an action that is partisan. we were discussing b.p.

then what do you do about that? tell us what you saw? >> one of the concerns with respect to the moratorium of offshore drilling. whether or not there was a partisan decision. the president, at least from my perspective, might have made the decision to satisfy the left, but, at the same time, the decision was very damaging to the people of louisiana and to the gulf coast. we live off of tourism and the gulf. we get oil and issue and the seafood. oftentimes, people don't fully understand the dynamics of how those different pieces work

together. we were very much frustrated with the moratorium and trying to push quickly. we felt it was extended because of partisan politics. >> talk about the media and their role. it was interesting on the panel, a producer made to him while they were on the talk show, they were trying to discuss serious ideas. the producer says. cut the bipartisanship and give us some grease. what role or responsibility does the media have do you think? in providing an atmosphere that can happen? >> i think it was clear that was

a tenuous part of the presidential election. the media i thought were unusually involved. it made it more important, more personal. i think anderson standing in front of mary yelling at her was completely natural. it's probably what every single person, you know, watching wanted to do. when you were in mississippi talking about where you were growing up. it was just an unusual amount of being a part of story. i think it's -- i won't say changed journalism, but television news from the dispassionate where when walter

cronkite said when kennedy was shot, it was remarked upon for years. yet now it's an everyday occurrence. >> i thought you meant anchors cry. [laughter] >> it's supposed to be about facts and truth and checking of facting before you publish or post versus media that is what we call the internet and the jungle of people who are not journalists and post and pushlish on other postings where the truth isn't verified. :

this is not atypical, story to

tell you. in the world of the internet, post first, fact check second, if at all. whether it is fox and msnbc, where i do see parallels in ideological bias, i have to say that glenn beck is the worst of the mall. the ideological bias in either of these organizations, where is the fact checking and the division between entertainment and journalism? >> you were in the eye of the storm. can you talk about the media and order in times of crisis? >> is tough. there are a couple of factors we have to deal with. the speed of the transformation

of the communication of the cycle we are working in, reporters are working harder and harder, and getting things out faster and faster, pushing decision makers, whether it is bipartisan are not, good decisions that you don't turn out right, sometimes you do not have the luxury. journalists who in many respect have clear moment for themselves for the competitive uses that take place amongst the media. on the plane on the air force one on september 11 when we left florida from the elementary school, we thought we were headed to washington but we went west. landing in the museum of. the decision was to go to one more place but we would condense the size of the package. meaning that we were going to

cut the pool of fresh reporters. we had to make a decision about which reporters would be kept in which would not, which ones would be left literally on the tarmac. i will not name the journalist, but he went crazy. he said we were all panicking, but i told him that he was panicking because now he would not be able to ride to his pulitzer prize-winning peace. you are dealing with the motions of journalists working through the crisis. it is not healthy for good decision making, to say the least. this is why i think, as i said, the ability for us to work in a bipartisan climate during a crisis will be more and more difficult.

>> you have no many ideas how many times i walked into the situation one -- the real one, not wolf blitzed's. [laughter] they are watching the media to find out what is going on. television stations are calling them to find out what is going on a it becomes a closed loop. i think that what anderson cooper did was exactly right. if you step back and look at the sweep of history, the greatest risk of the media is when they are on board. they often get things wrong. but i think the particular risk is when they feel they have to just put aside questions and concerns. therein lies more questions in the damage to the republic. >> what about the issue of

crisis as opportunity? the los angeles times did an interesting up at a couple of weeks ago in which the headline -- i do not know if you read it -- but he argued that old action in reality, americans resist change. cresson government to act boldly only when a national calamity forces that upon us. we all remember rohm emmanuel saying that you do not want a good crisis to go to waste. that it provides the opportunity to do things that normally would not be able to do. if these things are true, how do the parties come together to make sure that these opportunities are not wasted? >> human nature, not limited to politicians. we do not pay our bills until the collector is that the door. we tend to wait for the last

moment of a crisis before we take an affirmative action that we probably should have months before. the leadership component of crisis, i think, is where it separates the women from the girls. or the men from the boy is. do you use that as an opportunity to bring people together to look past the five minutes of media headlines to figure out where you need to be in the next 24 hours and 36 hours? not just the next five minutes? i think that in several places, you can see that. in the bp still they say that it ruined the career of charlie crist, but resurrected the career of bobby jindal based computer of the region based completely on how they responded

in the first week. i think that the leadership component cannot be decimated. when you talk about of tarp it probably cemented the defeat of john mccain when it became clear that he was not a player in the resolution that barack obama was willing to engage. what happens in those moments is what is critical. >> i cannot speak from the perspective of the stimulus bill, for instance, saying things like meeting a similar crisis with a similar spill to put people back to work and provide jobs and do whatever we can do to come back, what i saw was a lack of bipartisan -- lack

of republicans and democrats working together. based at least on the perception of myself, in republican, more of a democratic peace of legislation, a democratic agenda of more government, more spending. possibly paying back the 2008 election. with respect to the stimulus bill, we therefore sought a massive spending bill that the country is now trying to get out from under. >> i guess that i am john [unintelligible] here. i have no problems with disasters that are beyond our control and the political process in which we sometimes pull together, sometimes we do

not. my problem continues to be more than the ordeal from the white house, but that to this day to be a president these manufactured crises are motivated to score points. what the democrats did to george bush in the 1980's, republicans did that to bill clinton in the 1990's, and democrats did it again to george bush in the new millennium. is there one republicans standing up saying that this country needs to legislate, not investigate? let's cut out another cycle of investigating each other, criminalizing were using investigatory powers the same way the general mccarthy -- that joseph mccarthy used his. that is a manufactured crisis that the media feeds on.

they're weak -- ratings go up when there's a lot of scandal. this is what made cable television in the clinton years. the latest breaking scandal. the lincoln bedroom merited a full week of coverage because of invitations to stay overnight? or the iran contra? looking back now, it looked like a political argument made into an independent counsel case. we are not out of the cycle yet, republicans are still in the house misusing subpoena power. >> do you think that your successor overreached? >> i do think that the public is a good judge of that. they are saying that rohm emmanuel was famous for saying not to let it go to waste.

but he is pushing for too much beyond what they were talking about. trying to make up for 40 years worth of democratic congressional demand and the agenda items. saying -- wait a minute, that was a curtailing of that. you could argue the same thing with president bush. as far as the issue of going into iraq, we made the same argument. in the beginning there was bipartisanship on everyone's part. then the coalition started to crumble. you have to constantly understand the mandate the public is giving you. the public is pretty good at slapping back. >> i think that that is exactly right. going through the entire impeachment thing with president

clinton, at the worst of it his job approval rating was 71. it was not his personal conduct so much that they were so appalled that the media. the media could not get enough of it. republicans loved it. the chairman of the government oversight committee at the time did a two -- two year investigation of the president's christmas card list. no kidding. hundreds of thousands of legal bills from innocent public employees. it was terrific. you know what, the voters -- they said, you know, they will not promote -- they will not reward that. in a sense i am more sanguine about building these things. going through these things.

days after the president had to testify in front of that grand jury that can start videotaped across the world, we had to bomb osama bin laden. we had actual intelligence about where he was in afghanistan. president clinton launched a massive set of cruise missiles to go in and kill him. there were some on the right that accused him of doing that to distract attention away. as a political person, the generals and the joint chiefs are not political. then, he was a 71. we did not need to get to 91. there was no need to distract by their own constituents. they believed the president when he said there was this really bad terrorist. even at the worst constitutional

crisis in which they work impeaching him, we launched operation desert fox. citizens were cool about it. thinking that we usually sort these things through right. >> this is the last panel of the day. we are going to go to questions a little bit earlier. there is a microphone right here. again, we were looking for a brief remarks, but we are really looking for questions and not speeches. >> i saw you this morning on the morning joe and i was wondering if you would say something about the george bush memoirs and why the call was made to do a fly over instead of going to meet with leaders in baton rogue? >> first and foremost, i think that the book does provide some insight. the president had to make a lot

of controversial decisions in his presidency and it gives an opportunity for people to hear the firsthand account of those. there were a lot of things that took place. it is always compelling to hear the president's view on those things. in that respect, katrina was the darkest week of our tenure in the white house. and we had dealt with a lot. we had had a series of gaffes in decision making. in the book president bush takes accountability for the flyover. he accept accountability for the mission accomplished. you want me to be honest? i gave approval for the mission accomplished. but to hear nothing about it in the book. it is the reason so many are loyal to him. he is a nice person.

there were divisions in the staff about whether we should fly over or not. one thing about a crisis, i do not care how much technology you have, if you are managing a crisis the decision makers have to be in one place. trying to plug in calls and do that, you cannot advocate and make good judgment with good recommendations. ultimately it was decided that it would be good to do that. ultimately, as this got compounded, my own friend and colleague decided to write a book being very critical of president bush and he talked a lot about the process of decision making around that. the last thing that i told him when the decision was made was not to let them take a picture of him. somehow, the press was allowed to take a picture and it was

memorialized. a picture being worth 1000 words. >> we had the clinton days, here in louisiana we probably just got through the bitter days. with respect to the way that a better handle his crisis situation, have we turned a page? are we writing a new book in terms of how to handle the crisis? a narrow political crisis or any type of crisis in order to be elected again? >> can i just say i am shocked at how quickly louisiana got over that? there are two things that people

really hate about politicians. one of them is hypocrisy. but maybe they hate talking about sex more. i do not know. the media is clearly uncomfortable talking about sex. in some respects, i think, that with sarah vitter, if it was ok for louisiana, people let it go because it did not seem to be that big of a deal here. people in washington stopped talking about it because it seemed like people here had stopped talking about it. unlike south carolina, where there was a huge uproar. the people in south carolina acted differently than here. >> the the other big difference is that governor would not shut up. like vitter did.

there is this entire view of getting out early, answering the questions. there was none of that. he retreated to his media base and he won by 19 points. partially, you are right, because it was essentially a private problem. he was not doing a public harm. i am coming from the perspective of a person being deceived by a challenger who also has very questionable character. seeing it from the perspective of our society and how we are entrenched in our ways of thinking and partnerships, such

that we are overlooking the bad things of the candidates. in order to vote along party lines. republicans were willing to overlook what senator vitter did. the democrats in this area were willing to overlook the character of baggage of my opponent. >> what does that say about society today? >> i would be disappointed in myself and others would be disappointed in me if they had heard me before. private life needs to be private life. we were that way as a society for a long time, from john kennedy and beyond. somehow the rules changed. i tried to chase down when that

happened around the gary hart issue. i am one of the people that is glad that that issue did not bring down some vitter. i would have brought him down for his reactionary views, but not that. >> well, you won by 19 points. in louisiana. [laughter] >> condolences on the election. it was great to have a republican going for new orleans and hopefully we will have one soon. majority of americans had not heard of you before you cast your first boat for health care. can you talk about your process in trying to act with democrats in a bipartisan manner? why were other republicans not willing to work with democrats? not only with coverage to the

20% of americans that did not have it, but cutting costs for the americans that already had it? >> i think that my role as a u.s. representative to ask myself the question of where my loyalty lives -- doesn't lie with my party or the people that i serve? whenever i am confronted with that issue, i go through a big number of steps. the first, will this issue forced me to compromise my core moral values? two, but is my duty with respect to the people in my district? with respect to the health care vote, the very first vote on the house bill, even though i did not -- i was not happy with the bill. but because it did not require

me to compromise a moral position, a very personal moral position that have, i thought about what my duty was to represent my people going forward when i was confronted with the senate bill and when we worked so hard to put in this language to prohibit federal funds from going to abortion, we were unsuccessful in doing that. i was again confronted with a dilemma on the one hand, holding up certain moral and symbols and voting along the constituency it represents. with respect to the senate bill, i felt i could not vote for it or compromise those for moral values but at the end of the day i must be able to live with myself. i voted against the senate

version of the bill because there was a conflicting moral stance. >> in times of high above partisanship, how do we prevent government overreach? >> the fact that you raised it shows some wisdom. i tried to open with this. i am very much for government getting a long as we can and articulating very thoughtfully. this is the time that i get most nervous. when everyone agrees. i was not freaked out by the patriot act, perce per se -- per se, but i am still mad at

president bush and even the democrats that were for it. they were to bipartisan. simply the fact that you asked that question suggests that we will be ok. either in your civic life as a voter, member of the media -- seriously. absolutely no partisanship? go to north korea. they have no partisanship there. we want to get along and get things done. >> there is a batting average year. when we work together and bring people together in times of crisis where the legislation in which i agree -- i will love to agree on the patriot act, but

more times than not my heart tells me that in history but partisanship during those times was a good example of that. the bottom line is that it will come in under budget and it will probably make money before it is over. >> the patriot act is a good example. the timing coincided with the explosion of the internet. in a positive way, i think. it was an uncomfortable experience with on-line visibility and i think he will never again have a day where transparency does not exist. it is simply impossible because of the internet. which is a good thing. we saw it in the health care process in a way that was

overwhelming and annoying to the legislative working on it. not before some one allowing the deal to be scrutinized, posted over and over again. congress will never be in a position again to do those backroom deals to do the kind of late night drafting of amendments. >> one thing about the entire bipartisan policy council this year is this great organization i would agree with all -- paul, partisanship is necessary for democracy. alexander hamilton and thomas severson started a book of tracing the history of crisis and scandal. starting out with the chapter of

the immense hatred that they had for each other. and the fundamental debate between federal power in washington against state power, going right through the civil war and the last election. we can argue issues and debate left against right, chuck robb was a democrat in the republican state back then, standing for democratic principles. the symbol of a great president. he stood for democratic principles, found in something called the democratic leadership counci everyone accused him of shedding his progressive and rules and accused him of being centrist. what this counsel stands for,

you do it in a civil manner. you listen. you disagree and you try to find compromise to solve the problems that are incremental. most people on health care, i would not have support of looking back. if we cannot get 70% of democrats and republicans to come together on something fundamental like changing health care, it should not have been passed. it should that had been done one step at a time. -- should have been done one step at a time. rep. partisanship coming together and finding incremental

change and compromise. [applause] >> great speech. except, guess what? hundreds of millions of dollars spent by the insurance companies and other industries that were squeezed, squeezing us all on our own health care costs. spending that money on a disinformation campaign. i agree on everything that you said. but i regret to say -- >> we can only take one more question. i am very sorry. >> i would like to elaborate on senator vitter. it was not simply a personal matter. from what i remember, he did business with a prostitute. is that not criminal? we are not just looking at a personal matter. he actually committed a crime.

>> we will just pass that one. your question? >> i guess my frustration comes from two things that have happened recently. the financial crisis and the oil spill. orry, louisiana is my state. i have friends that live in the gulf coast that rely on industry. businesses, gas stations, restaurants. it really disturbs me that the

president did not come to our aid soon enough. he did not, in my opinion. he should have been there, forcing bp to clean up the oil as it was coming up immediately. the situation with the finance crisis, that is criminal. you cannot except -- expect those millionaires in front of the senate hearing committee to answer honestly about what happened. you do not become a billionaire by not knowing what is going on. >> can we have a question, please? aye >> ah! what is it that i, the freckle

on the face of america, can expect from our government and the president of our country as far as protection democrats not just talking about protection against terrorism like 9/11, but terrorism like chemical warfare. that is how well a lot of us perceive what happened in the gulf. also, the financial crisis in which these billionaires, it was sold from the top to the bottom. >> let's -- >> let me finish what i was going to say. this is going to happen again. i do not think that these people care about us. $27 trillion by a loss that is not being taxed.

and lack of income for the country as well. i want to know from you, you know, what is the government supposed to be doing for us as far as protecting us? protecting our money, our livelihood, that is what we see every day. we do not see terrorism every day, but that type of terror is a different kind of terror. >> on the issue of the oil spill in connection with katrina, in both instances i sought a breakdown in government and the decision making process. the cost, in my perception, is the desire of the

administration, both administrations, to protect that image. i saw that with katrina and again during the oil spill. when we focus on trying to paint and protect an image rather than focus on making decisions we wind up making bad decisions. >> final thoughts? [applause] >> 16ew senators were elected in november. here is a brief look at two of them. in missouri, roy blunt defeated robin carnahan. he is currently serving his seventh term in the u.s. house of representatives. in new hampshire, republican

kelly ahotte defeated paul rode. for continuing political coverage, check out our web sites c-span.org,. let's take a look at the new members of congress with the c- span video library. every member is listed with the district map, campaign finances, and appearances on c-span. free on your computer any time. washington, your way. the peace corps is celebrating its 50th anniversary. the current agency director joined previous directors to talk abouthat they learned it from running the peace corps. from harvard university, this is about one of our 15 minutes. -- this is about one hour and 15

minutes. place where generations of had a history of making a diffence. president kennedy challenge to america's young people to help people in need, promote good will over the world. that challenge became the peace corps. tonight our story comes from sierra leone, where a brutal civil war forced the peace corps to pull out over a decade ago. tonight, ron allen has the story of the first u.s. volunteers to venture back in. >> jessica now does without so many things she took for granted in new hampshire. she draws on well water for a mornings in a bucket shower. breakfast is a fried chicken. away fromrd being home. waking up and thinking, i want starbucks. >> she is among 37 u.s. peace corps volunteers in sierra

leone. a desperately poor nation, devastated by civil war, that so dangerous even the peace corps pulled out. 15 years later, the first american trainees are back, learning a local language, preparing to be teachers in schools so ravaged students often do not even have books or pencils. scotts order was a firefighter in northern california. >> when things are hard, they are good, and that is what the peace corps is about. >> the most important step arning to live like the people they are here to serve. >> i wanted to be in a situation where i could when my skills to people who need it. there is no better place than here. >> he has his positions in missing quote -- his possessions in a single room. no running water, just a few comforts of home. >> this is a basic. bare minimum. >> they first came together in

washington this summer. mcchrystal a programs a civilian embassadors launched bike -- recruits to a program as civilian embassadors launched by president kennedy. leaders here hope the arrival of the americans send a clear gnal to the rest of the world that this country is peaceful, save, and moving forward. over the years, volunteers have left a lasting impression. he is an accounting here with fond memories of an american teacher from 40 years ago. what would you say to him? >> thank you. >> it is the warm welcome that they believe will help them through the tough days ahead, including the drudgery of laundry. show me your knuckles. >> my war wounds. >> we are not going to turn the country around, develop it, but if we can teach kids.

>> you are a little part. >> they are carrying on what has been a tradition a adventure for a young americans lending a hand in far flung corners of the worl >> and because they are carrying on a great tradition, in almost 50 years since the peace corps started, more than 200k00,000 americans have served in 139 countries. you can see a gallery of the photographs and submit your around at n.com. that is our broadcast for this wednesday night. thank you for being here with us. i am brian williams. we hope to see you back here tomorrow evening. good night. [applause]

>> good evening and thank you for coming. i am mary jo bane, the academic dean at the kennedy school, and i am delighted to welcome you to tonight's event. the john f. kendy for at the kennedy school is celebrating a number of evens in honor of the 50th anniversary of john f. kennedy's presidency, and tonights e of those events. we are celebrating the fact that 50 years ago this week president kennedy announced the formation of the peace corps. we have with us tonight the current director of the peace corps and three past directors

of the peace corps. they cover four administrations and about 20 years of the peace corps's history. the hon. elaine chao was director of the peace corps from 1991 to 1992, during the first bush administration. she went on to become the secretary of labor in the second bush and adminisation, and she was the longest serving secretary of labor since '05, and the first asian american woman in the cabinet. she is a distiuished fellow at the heritage foundation. mark gearen was director of the peace corps between 1995 and 1999. before that, he was a director of communications for the clinton white house.

since 1999, he has been the president of hobart and william smith college. gaddi vasquez was director of the peace corps between 2002 and 2006, during the second bush administration. before that, he worked at the securities and exchange commission and worked in politics in california. he is currently vice president for public affairs at southern california edison. aaron williams is the current director of the peace corps. he came to the peace corps directorship from all long career and development with us aid. he was a peace corps volunteer in the dominican republic back in the late 1960's. director willis asked that we begin our evening tonight by observing a moment of silence in

honor and respect for a peace corps volunteer who passed away while serving in niger and a few days ago. her name was stephanie camp, and our thoughts and prayers are with her family and fends. thank you for that. and now we will start the evening by thinking back 50 years ago this week, when president kennedy was at the university of michigan and, late at night, doing what you will see. >> how many of you are willing to spend your days -- as technicians or engineers? how many of you are willing to work in the foreign service? on your willingness to do that, not merely to serve one or two

years in the service, but on your willingnesso contribute part of your life to this country, i think will depend the answer for another our free society can succeed. i think it can. and i think americans are willing to contribute. [inaudible] >> so, i was a peace corps volunteer in liberia between 1963 and 1965. i was in liberia when president kennedy was assassinated. and as i look back on that experience in my own life, i can say that without question it changed my life. it expanded the world for me. it introduced me to public service. it set me on the path to the career i have had up until this time. those of us who were in live.

at that time were mostly teaching, teaching in elementary and secondary sools -- tho of us who re in liberia at the time. as i look back on that, i think that we did no harm. i think we talked a lot of children. i think we were pretty good ambassadors for the united states of america -- we talked a lot of children. we probably helped keep the president in office for an additional couple of years -- we taught a lot of children. that may not have been a good thing. we went in with the idealism to change the world and came out with a better sense of what it was. so that is one volunteers reflection back. you guys have been more recent and have had much broader experience, so i am hoping you would start us off by each taking a few minutes to speak briefly about the role of the

peace corps in the lives of voluntrs, in the lives of the nation, and in the lives of the world. >> i was not a volunteer. in fact my successor in 1993 was the first peace corps director who was a returned peace corps volunteer, and that was a big deal with the agency, because the returned peace corps volunteers wanted of returned peace corps volunte to be a director. i think my experience was, as a director, was a very enlightening one for me as well. i learned so much about the world, even though i myself have had a very diverse background. just to sidetrack a lite bit, one of the reasons i never

became a volunteer was because i was an immigrant to this country. my formative years were spent in trying to survive in this country. so i did not really understand that there were all these other opportunities, institutions that were available. and also, i was the oldest of six children. as a new immigrant family, it was my responsibility to help my parents support my younger sisters. but my experience coming as an immigrant was helpful in my experience as a peace corps director when we tried to recruit, because we have underrepresentation in certain racial and ethnic groups, and we tried to find why that was happening. a lot of times there were a lot of new immigrants -- the ability to forgo income for two years

was simply a luxury that not many could afford. so that was helpful, in terms of testing our message to attract a more diverse work force. there are some wonderful people here. i do not want to take too much time. one of my most vivid memories when i travelled abroad is how much i learned from the volunteers and how enthusiastic they were, and how each one of them, regardless if they had good or bad experience, have all said that the two yr or more experienced was a seminal part of their lives. their whole perception of the world changed. sometimes a volunteers were disappointed that they could not do more to contribute to improving a country. what i tell them is, you as a single volunteer may not see the fruits of your labor, but i get

the chance to travel throughout the world and to see the collective work of volunteers, almost a generation after generation, spread across the world, and the picture that i seek is a powerful picture of young young americans who are willing to devote their lives to a country they have never been to, to a place thehave never seen, to people they have never known, and try to help, and that is a powerful statement. >> thank you very much for having us. like ever went up here, i think we have all been thinking this week about the 50 years of the peace corps and what that would mean. to your question, i have thought of the domestic dividends. i think elaine reflected well about the difference for an individual peace corps voluntee for the difference

they make in communities around the world. i think one thing to put into the mix of our conversation is the domest dividend, and what it means for our country, as brian williams reported. there now are 200,000 americans to have had this experience. when i was director, there were six members of congress who had been peace corps volunteers -- three republicans, three democrats. perfect. you see it everywhere. people have gone on to lives of consequence in business and law and medicine, all whole range of fields. it is with excitement that we gather here for the 50th. one thing to kick off, i think it may be time for those of us who care about the peace corps and certainly when you think about -- present kennedy did the bold idea, but really

executed by sargent shriver, to cast an unflinching eye at the peace corps today. we should scale up with more volunteers a more funding, as director williams is trying to do. more americans want to do it then is allowed for. we should look at the length of service. is it one size fits all? with more americans coming to the peace corps with different experiences. should we look at the use of technology? sargenthriver and went up to me with the first peace corps volunteers, they were sending cards back home and -- postcards back home d getting answers every six months. the world has changed. more partnerships. we've created ngo's and groups around the world.

how do we expand international volunteer service? as we celebrate the 50th, i think shriver a kennedy would be urging us to think in different ways for how we honor the legacy of those 200,000 voluntee. for the past, for future volunteers, a ticket to the next 50 years. for my part, it was a privilege of a lifetime to be the director of the peace corps. i think we would all agree with that. it is something that -- i a excited to be able to reflect with you on this conversation. >> i will build on what rk said with regard to serving as dictor of the peace corps was an opportunity of a lifetime. it was transforming for me because it gave me the opportunity to lead and nage an organization of volunteers and professional staff who

embraced fully the bolddea tha t president kennedy articulated. subsequent to my duties as director of the peace corps, i served as ambassador to the united nations organizations and roll up from 2006 to 2009, where we dealt principally with food and agricultural policy during the global food crisis. and as i traveled the world dealing with these new issues, it was always a bit astounding to me that wherever i traveled, the fact that i did then the director of the pea corps, even in countries where the peaccorpdid not have the existing programs, have left such a meaningful and powerful legacy, not only in capital cities and amongst the ranks of leaders of government, but amongst community leaders and people at the grassroots, people who still remember the impact of

americans serving in these communities. i will never forget my first trip overseas was to afghanistan shortly after the bombing had ceased, and we were meeting with the administer of women's affairs in kabul, which you can imagine is a formidable task. the minister spoke a great english. and i said to her, you speak great english. where did you get your training? she said to me, i was taught english by peace corps volunteers. those other kinds of special moments that, when you have these encounters, you realize the powerful legacy of the dividend that has en talked about internationall where presidents and prime ministers were touched by americans in these rural villages anda have left that legacy. as an ambassador, i had the

opportunity to interact with chiefs of mission. i just met with a gathering of former u.s. ambassadors in texas. many of them said, i was a peace corps volunteer. one many leaders around the world are making an impact and making a distance. all of the first director of the peace corps post-9/11. my wife looked at me and said, "are you sure you want to take this job? this is going to be a tall order." she wondered if americans might turn away from the idea of gng overseas in the aftermath of 9/11. a few communications and press media folks conducted interviews with me as the first

director after 9/11. they said surely you must be concerned that americans may not want to go overseas as peace corps volunteers. ladies and gentleman, i a pleased to tell you that the numbers of applicants skyrocketed to historic levels. the interest in the peace corps escalated in a dramatic fashion. and i think it speaks volumes about the american spirit and the willingness that we are not content to just be spectators. in eect, we want to be participants and shape our world and our nation, the future of this world. but also the fact that americans young and old are seeking the opportunity to advance the idea that president kennedy articulate it. and 50 years later, it remains a bold and strong ideal. i have always believed that one of the tests of a great idea is its sustainability. and if the journey of 50 years is a test, we are in a great place for the peace corps to do

even greater things in the years and generations to come. thank you. >> what a wonderful introduction from a director. i find it is a privilege to say that i have worked for the peace corps, acting having -- after having served as a volunteer in the peace corps. i never imagined i would be someone with the opportunity to do this. i have been a beneficiary of able to establish volunteers throughout this tenure. i have been in 18 countries. let me share what i consider to be one of the great, great success stories of the peace corps. when i go tthe country, typically a will meet with the ambassador in the country. often, the embassador or some of the staff are former peace corps volunteers.

i will see the government officials, the minister of health, the minister of education. in their ely years, they had a positive experience as a peace corps volunteer. i want to talk about what i just saw last week in our very first peace corps country. i had business with our volunteers in education and health and information technology and small business to the element, etc. i will run into the heads of various international ngos doing great work in the field. they also are peace corps alumnus. we have this great net -- this great nexus 50 years later, which is a testimony to president kennedy, and the people who find the best way to find places for these volunteers to serve. i was in gonna last week. , was our first country --

ghana was our first country. 10 months after kennedy spoke, the first group went to ghana. by any stretch of the imagination of government, that isiraculous. [laughter] we have all had expiences with initiatives that did not launch that fast. we have had 50 years of uninterrupted service in ghana. i had a chance to meet with the leership in government, the private sector, the nonprofits, and society. every man and woman told me they had had a very positive, seminal experience, a life changing experience, with a peace corps volunteer. this is an incredible testimony for what the peace corps has done and the service america has provided in a country like ghana. everywhere you go, you see remarkable americans dedicated to service, who are patient, who are innovative, who are making a

difference at the grass-roots level. they are working in the community, side by side. the peace corps volunteer might be the only american these communities will ever have the opportunity to get to know face to face, the true face of america. it is americans working in these places. the volunteers go there. we need to grow because more americans want to serve. as we grow the peace corps, we want to make sure we invest in training, staff, and support for volunteers. we are doing that. fortunately, the peace corps has always enjoyed bipartisan support. we continue to enjoy that support marvelously. i think that one of the things we need to do to build on the legacy of john f. kennedy and the marvelous dynamic leadership of the shriver is

that we need to look for ways to expand the peace corps. this year, we moved into indonesia, sierra leone, and columbia -- colombia, three countries that were part of the kennedy-shriver legacy. will continue to expand. the peace corps on the 50th anniversary gives us a tremendous mandate from the american people. i always told my staff and the people i talked to about the 50th anniversary. it is not so much an opportunity for us to pat ourselves on the back and say look how much we gave and how much we received. it is too late to let america celebrate the singular opportunity, this wonderful idea that president kennedy launched 50 years ago, october 15. look at what it has wrought. it is a truly major performance that has affected many. >> i want to ask a couple of

questions about the effect of the peace corps, and then i want to pick up on mark's question about the future. let me ask you this question. many of you have spoken, as i did, about the effect of the peace corps on the peace corps volunteers, and on training a country -- trimming a cadre of people who make contributions in other ways. let me ask you to speak more specifically. i would like to start with you, director williams. you came out of the aid community and came to the peace corps from worki with usaid. what has the peace corps contributed, positively and negatively, to the development effort in africa, in some of the less developed countries of the world? then i hope others will come in onhat question. >> i think the most important thing the peace corps has contributed to the development process, and one thing that is important to the development

process -- it is a generation presses. the revolution took place in 1960. we need to reinvest in security worldwide. that is current in terms of development. the peace corps has always worked at the grass-roots level, the community level, in terms of developing capacity, inspiring young people to get an education, to take on leadership responsibility. i think that is the important factor in what the peace corps provides in terms of recipient countries, in terms of how americans can interact on a global basis. that is a bottom-line accomplishment, one of the greatest investments we can hope to achieve. it is developing capacity at the local level. for example, whether we are working in health or education, we are trainer's of people. we are the ones who are trying to make sure we extend the hands of the community working on their priorities, because we have to be invited into a country, and we work our

national priorities. to me, that is the most important thing we do. >> the important thing is that the peace corps has to remain relevant. part of that, as the director has alluded to, is that you have to have a willingness to adapt development programs that help the peace corps in a host country. you have to be invited. during my tenure as, tre was a program in mexico, which was a fit in the history of the peace corps. it required delicate negotiations so the program was acceptable to the host gornment. it had to be relevant and a little bit out of the box to what the peaceorps have traditionally done calling in to countries. this is what the government of mexico and representatives of the government were looking for. you have to be constantly assessing and raquel betting the programs throughout the peaceful world and to assure they are relevant, pertinent, and that it is not only yielding a positive for those countries. frankly, the volunteers in their

service have to walk away with a sense of fulfillment, a sense of accomplishment, which in turn creates another recruiter for the peace corps once you come back to the united states and begin to readjust to home life. so i think those are critically important. i think the training component is very, very important, the component of trading in a country to peace corps volunteers. it is very relevant. volunteers want to feel they are well suited, well-trained, well- equipped to do their jobs, so there is a feeling of fulfillment and sustainability when difficult times come. i think any volunteer would tell you this challenges come earlier than later sometimes. that is very important. i think the relevance. i think in terms of what is negative, i will not name names, but i will simply say that some of the most agonizing episodes of our time, and i am not sure it is negative, but it can be viewed as negative, is when you

have to make a decision about pulling out of the country. there are various reasons to pull out of the country. it can be security, emerging conflict, political stability. it can be a painful decision. at the end of the day, it is the director who is responsible to make the decision. particularly in countries where you have countries to find, as the leader of the agencies, you have to clear in your decision making and you have to be willing to articulate to the host country why you have to close, suspend, or mify a program in order t not damage, frankly, the great effort you have built over 10, 20, 30 yes that has to be pulled for an anticipated exposure. those exposures have to be booked at very carefully. >> i do not think there is any question the peace corps has been a force for tremendous good, and in terms of development. we are fortunate to have aaron as a director.

he has extraordinary experience amongst all the directors. we have all seen it in anecdotes. the challenge though it is in the work of development by its nature. it has a very long time horizon. we are driven by the constant assessment, having quarterly reports, but the metrics used for approving new work. and afterwas, with public money, that is important. but i would put a bit of a marker in the conundrum of the peace corps. that is how you measure it in this way. we all of a story similar to this one. when i went to kenya after the bombings in 1995, i spoke to the minister of education. he said, "the first american i ever met and the best teachers i ever had was my peace corps teacher." i went back to my office and

looked him up. he was in sth massachusetts. i told him stories on the phone. he said, "i will have to look at the picture. there were 62 kids in my class." here is the development question. when the measure the success of that peace corps volunteer? is it after his 27 months of service? or is it 30 years later, in this random encounter with a peace corps director and a minister of education? this is not to say that we should not assess and measure. course we should. but there is by definition an important matter which should holdn to in terms of the peace rps. that is the personal element or the bonds of friendship. that is one of the key goals in that transference. that is a very good question.

>> is the teacher the peace corps teacher? >> i am a big believer in works up out of a job. >> in a globalized economy in which we work and live, we need to have a better understanding of people across the world, outside of our borders. and it is important that they understand us. i never met a white person until i came to america. and i had no impressions. but i do remember we would hear stories about this all the time. i remember seeing peace corps volunteers. but i never met them. so in this world wide economy which we are now such active participants in, we need to understand how other people think and what their cultural background is, their philosophical outlook. the question is a very importa

one which i alluded to in my opening remarks. that is peace corps volunteers are very often type eight types. they want to have complishments under their belt. they are anxious to get things going. i tell them, "you are a participant, a catalyst, a facilitator in th whole fabric of activity that is going on in the world. you may not be able to see the product of your labor, but i do, at least a larger part did you do." i think that gives a lot of comfort to volunteers. there is not only the geographical expands but the temporal expense of tim you can see what volunteers do. and they do this in very modest one on one achievements, which is really so heartwarming. because that is how volunteers make progress. they reach each part, one heart by one heart.

if i may, i will say two other things, one positive and one-. i am always so impressed with how fluent voluntes become in the language of thr country. and we have the best course of- speakers from these volunteers, most of whom are young. they pick up the language like that. i went to hungary in 1991. hungarian is a very difficult and which. the volunteers in hungary said there were volunteers there who are amazingly good hungarian speakers. we have now people who can speak another language, who understand the culture. when i went to russia, i was amazed by the can-do attitude that peace corps volunteers in fused to the people that had just emerged from the heavy yoke

of totalitarianism, who felt their spirits were crushed. this was 1991. they felt they could not do anything on their own. yet we had this wonderful young people from america who would ll these former russians, ukrainians, albanians -- albani was not a part of the former soviet union, but it was behind the iron curtain. people at the republics of the former soviet union would find they could have control over their lives, that they can start a new business if they wanted to, and that things will come together. i think the can-do attitude is another very wonderful thing. i will say if there is anything negative, it is that sometimes cultures are hard. different cultures are very embedded and very, very complex. and sometimes, you know, we

introduce a new element. and i think we need to be careful of unintended consequences when we go into a society and tried to encourage them, inspire them to do all sorts of different things. there might be unintended consequences as well. >> interesting. let me ask if any of you would like to speak to the role of the peace corps in the foreign- policy of the united states. we were always being asked if we were spies. [laughter] we were not, at least as far as i know. [laughter] some of that still goes on, but we were also, as volunteers, kind of been contrasted with the folks in the gated communities of the embassy. that was when i decided i did not want to be foreign service officer. i wonder if any of you would like to speak to the role that the peace corps plays in the foreign policy of the united states.

>> i think we have a wonderful by president obama for americans to serve both internationally and domestically. the peace corps is a response to that call. that is an important part of our foreign policy. i think that various countries seek peace corps volunteers working within their community, shoulder to shoulder, living under the same conditions the average person in those villages live. that gives them a perspective on america that could not gain any other way. this is a tremendous experience. everywhere i travel, we have seen this time and time again. i think the other thing that is important is that peace corps is an independent agency, but our biggest supporters and cheerleaders are the u.s. ambassador around the world. they recognize the balance here -- they recognize the value of peace corps volunteers. they do everything to make sure

the have the space to do the great jobs they are doing in all the stors where we work. and that is really remarkable, i think. when you look at our partnerships with the government, with the nonprofit sector, with the business community, look at the way we devep young leaders in the countries where we surf, and that we give americans a chance to engage and develop leadership skills that will be so important to our nation in this global connection that wall talk about, i think this is an investment that we need to continually build on as we grow. >> the onlyhing i would add is that i think the genius of the peace corps is that it is not part of our foreign policy apparatus. i think it is brilliant that is separate. i think it is brilliant it is not part of the communities. there is no other reason than security for the volunteers. there is no misunderstanding of that. i think it is brilliant that our volunteers are serving in areas

that really do not have geopolitical -- going to ghana and places where our relationships are not of a foreign policy imperative. i think from that genuine, authentic service, going in peace and friendship, comes very good relations around the world. decidedly not an affirmative statemen about american foreign policy, western values, any of those things that were really the inspiration for that. >> before we turn over to the audience, i want to ask one more question. i want to discuss the comment you made earlier, mark, about the future of the peace corps. you said we need to be thinking now about how the peace corps should be different in the next decade and the next 50 years. you mentioned having it be bigger and in more countries and so on. but should the peace corps be doing different things?

should there be a different emphasis? do you want to pick up on that? i will let everybody else. >> the ps course is the power of an idea, a brilliant idea, a brilliantly executed by secretary shriver. everything about the peace corps is change and renewal, right down to the five-year rule. you can only work for five years. you bring in the new. certainly, i think the energy of the founders, president kennedy and shriver, would say is it right for the next 50 years? is it really 27 months for everyone? isn't it a scandal that we have 10,000 applicants of amecans who are wanting to do this? i do not know if they are already to the peace corps volunteers, but we say no to ousands of them. everyone of us went into

congress to get more money. that is less money than the military marching band. i like the military marching band. but it is a matter of priorities. we can scale up with volunteers. we can look at the length of service. we can raise greater collaborations and partnerships. the world is different than it was 50 years ago. if anyone would have wanted us to say, "keep missionentral," look at different areas, use of technology, it would have been president kennedy and sergeant server. there are a number of different ways we can honor the past and say true to our core mission, but do it in innovativeays with the kind of volunteers we are attracted, the world in which we live, the technology they could use, the lgth of service they could have, and working to be at the very poor front, after 50 years of service, to bring a broader

international service agenda around the world. >> how would you want things to change? >> i have a question for the current director. and this is actually allowed. and these are the kinds of questions that are being discussed, when you are in that position. our volunteers allowed to have cars? no. are they allowed to have scooters'? >> no motorcycles. too dangerous. >> these are some of the things that are being continuously debated. they are the subject of robust debate. you want to facilitate the volunteers ability to get the job done, but do you -- but you do not want to take them so much out of the environment in which they are in that it distinguishes them as somow being different, and thereby distancing them from the local

nationals that they are supposed to work and serve. so i think these questions are very timely. mark, you raised wonderful questions. the tug always is how do you change but still hold dear the common culture and touchdown values which characterize the agency as well as the volunteers. i think the peace corps volunteer culture is one of the strongest of any agency i have seen. most volunteers -- there is a very strong culture. how'd u preserve that and tackle some of the issues like technology? that is a real issue. >> we have obviously given a lot of thought to this recently at thpeace corps, because we are looking at how can we support the next generation of peace corps volunteers.

how can the next generation of peace corps volunteers be most effective? one of the great advantages we have now and in the future is that we recruit change agents. the people we recruit are highly motivated, very talented. they are the best and the brightest of our colleges and universities, people who have experience who could go back to the peace corps later in their care. we start out with critical raw material. the second thing is that we have a way of looking at the priorities of any given recipient country to determine what their priorities are. they are also more demanding. that is changing in the world of development. they are looking for people with higher skill levels. this is not 1960. when we went to liberia, they did not have a national development plan. now they do. the thing about the peace corps is that we take the generalist volunteer. the service is around 85% of our

volunteers. we train them to be marked finance supporters and promoters, to be teachers of english as a second language, which is the fastest-growing area worldwide for the peace corps. the other thing is getng back to something about linguistic skills. we train in 250 different by bridges. we have tremendous resources we can call upon to adapt to the new centurynd the new generation of peace corps volunteers. i am confident will be able to do that. we are going to look at the length of service, the fact that we are good to be thoughtful in terms of how we sharpen our tools to support volunteers. >> i wouldffer that one of the aims of the peace corps going forward is that the peace corps increasingly look like the panel sitting in front of you tonight. the reality is that the peace corps has, notwithstanding the great efforts of the current

director -- we made it a very high priority, my predecessors and successors -- the reality is that the peace corps has a long way to go to get to a pla where it truly looks like america. the reality is that the america 1961 was a different america. we are a much more diverse society. the peace corps is the face of america going overseas. i think we would be extraordinarily well served by embarking on a very aggressive effort. the secretary made an effort to one of the challenges we found when we did some of the field testing here in the united states, inquiring of people of color why is it that you are disinclined to go into the peace corps. the most frequent response was economics. first-generation college graduates caot do it. they cannot afford it. the cannot go off for two years. they have to get a job. those are the obstacles people cited as reasons the could not

going to the peace corps. that is a reasonable, viable, and thoughtful explanation, not lacking the desire and determination or willingness to serve, but having economic and other social hardships that exist within this community is sometimes. i would simply urge that the development and training are critically important. but i think that one of t greatest values the peace corps can bring -- i will never forget being in morocco and having someone said, "you do not look like an american." he said, "your skin is dark and your hair is dark." it is a different shade these days, but it was all dark back then. he said, "you do not look like an american." it gave me a platform to talk about the diversity of america. i think this is a critical component going forward and will be important in the future of the peace cor to have a depiction of the face of america in ways we have not seen in the past, for the benefit of the

united states of america. >> i want to invite members of the audience to go to the microphones and ask questions of the panel. one of the great tditions of is john f. kennedy jr. forum that all speakers agree to take questions from the audience. the audience in turn agrees to ask questions. i will remind you of the rule for asking questions in the forum. please identify yourself. please keep your question short and concise. and please make sure your question and with a question mark. [laughter] their arkansas four microphones, two upstairs and two down here. >> i am suzanne. i am from [unintelligible] when you were a director, dr. vasquez -- doctor [laughter]

director? i now also work in the field of international development. security issues around the world are increasing tremendously. so my question now is -- how is peace corps responding to this? how are you deciding now which countries you will go in? are you expecting them? it sounds as if you are expanding to include some more "higher risk" countries like colombia. i heard you are going to haiti. having lived i haiti last year, i am curious about how that is affected by -- even now the technically peace corps is not part of foreign policy, it is in a way. how the decisions being made involvg security and where you go? >> first of all, the security and health of our volunteers, as you know from your service, is

first and foremost for the peace corps. we are only going to countries where we find an environment that is practice of -- that is permissive, where we can safely put volunteers to do the work. we looked at colombia very carefully. we are going to an area where volunteers can teach in a safe environment. haiti is a large country. there are lots of places we can work with poor communities in haiti were volunteers will be perfectly safe. let me say that before we go into a country conduct a careful, in-depth assessment, working on the ground in that country, whether it is on the american side, the un, international donors, or the world bank. we look to make sure volunteers are going to be safe, first and foremost. that is on of the things all of us have had to be responsible for. >> i want to comment on that. you were obviously director during one of the most challenging times.

>> yours is a very important question. it was a question i was asked by many parents after 9/11. i should point out that 60% of volunteers of the peace corps today are women. the split is 60-40. whether we like it or not, the reality is that the level of concern, country to country -- the quesons come quickly and directly to the peace corps director. for us, we established the office of volunteer safety and security, which conducts the survey is the director has alluded to. ihink we have a very credible process. some of you may remember during my tenure the big day in news, a seven part series on the safety and security of the peace corps when i interviewed with the reporter, i asked why the interest in the peace corps. he said it was time for somebody to look at peace corps safety

and security. that created a good deal of interest on the hill, which generated legislation. it also generated tremendous response from the returned peace corps volunteer community. some of the proposals that were being floated -- for example, let's cluster the volunteers. let us get three or four volunteers to live together in one location. the feedback from the field, the volunteers, was overwhelming against this. the other was mandate whatever peace corps volunteer has to have a cell phone. that induced a reaction globally up, "not going there," from a lot of different reasons we will not going to. the greatest a colder in all of this is the volunteer, who best knows, in concert with the staff and director, what standards for safety and security are best for that country, and which are most appropriate. it is a constant state of vigilance. i think any of us here -- i did not want to speak to the other

directors. if there was anything that caus me to turn and toss, it was not legislation or funding. it was always safety and security. i needed peace of mind as director of the agency that our policies and practices at headquarters and around the world were a standard that could meet the test, given the difficult circumstances. i think by and large the peace corps has done a great job of providing relatively good safety and security. >> the question over here. >> my name is karen. i am a fellow at the center. i live in kenya, where i was in the peace corps. i went in in 1965, and i went back to live there about 40 years later. the thing that surprised me the most when i went back was the gigantic ngo community which had not existed when i was there in the peace corps. and i have my thoughts about ngos, but my greatest worry when i saw them was -- was the peace

corps a template for the ngos who come in and do for kenya what kenyon's should be demanding that the government do for them? when i hear about an expansion of the peace corps, that makes me very nervous, because i think, and i would like to -- i think what many kenyans would say, and i have talked to many who do not think the peace corps is any different than the other western ngos -- they do not even live that badly. they would say to you, "why are you sending the peace corps here? why don't you use that money and helped to fund programs that kenyans, 40% of whom are unemployed, including many students i teach at the university who can i get jobs when they finish -- why aren't you just giving them money so that kenyans can do for themselves and demand of their government that they provide the services that your peace corps people are providing?"

>> a great question. would you start off on that o? >> per se, thank you for your service as a volunteer. it is an interesting question, and i won i think the peace corps has wrestled with on and off. i would observe the question of the scale and the actual finances of the peace corps, the actual budget of the peace corps and what that would really mean if the peace corps did not exist. if you took literally dollar for dollar, i do not think you have anywhere near the impact, the leveraging impact, of a peace corps volunteer's time. the broader point -- i would share your view that what has changed since you were a volunteer, which is one of my observations about the partnerships for the next 50 years, is the explosion of the ngo community. we would all agree it can vary in terms of its effectiveness. the question for the peace corps, going forward, is how can they get into some of these organizations or not?

i think the peace corps could provide extraordinary help workers around the world. like any other alternative, much less cost, it wanted to, if we funded to do it. my own view is i think these partnerships are essential to the peace corps, whether or not our volunteers are with them. there are different variants of how that are currently operating around the world. i do not see that changing in the developing world as we see that sector explosion. i thin the question for the peace corps is how doe best address it my own take -- i would respectfully disagree with you that the dollar for dollar exchange would not have anywhere near the leverage of the voluntrs have around the world. >> my name is vanessa bradford gary. i am a doctor at mass general. i worked at the harvard medal

school. one of the things we are trying to work on -- this is going to play a little bit of the last question. it is the idea of a global health service corps, creating loan forgiveness and scholarship in order to send people overseas into structured programs and in partnership with the places that we are working to develop capacity, new doctors, nurses, pharmacists, technological capacity, and to be able to make investments. somebody already mentioned this to make our jobs redundant. it is about building our partners. the idea has existed for a while. it has been shot down in number of times. we are trying to reinvigorate it. there has been an explosion in global halt interest. global health is now seen as central to our security, development, economists, overall well-being. it is a two-part question and i apologize for that.

one thought is you have mentioned the idea of sending health workers overseas. how often do you see doctors applying, or nurses, or people who have trained and are potentially going overseas to the peace corps? my second question is what do you think the feasibility is? how can we begin to see a program like this take place, either to get the political will going or to get the hill to be willing to do a program like this, or to see -- would this be an extension of the peace corps? i also want to thank you all for gathering, because this is sort of an incredible collection and it is wonderful to hear your perspectives. i will put back to my question. figure. >> first of all, your idea and what you are trying to do is a marvelous idea, and i think you ought to continue to discuss this with the various sources you have been in contact with. i think to the eent the peace corps could participate in that initiative, it would be a perfect partnership. one of the things we are trying

to do is to expd partnership the peace corps is engaged with, with u.s. government agencies, with the private sector, and with leading development ngos around the world. we need to be able to provide better training. we need peace corps volunteers to become more effective at the local level. partnerships are an important part of what we are trying to do. getting back to the first question, about recruitment of people who have health care experience and expertise, there is a healthy percentage receive. not many doctors. more nurses. we see retired doctors. many retired doctors -- i met one not long ago who wanted to go to the peace corps. he did not want to have anything to do with madison. he wanted to do something entirely different. [laughter] he ended up being a teacher in the ukraine. we try to accommodate those type of interests. there is a pretty healthy cohort

of people in health care. they are going into the peace corps. we try to encourage that. the other thing we do is we train generalists to work at the grass-roots level to work on capacity development, an extension agency in the health- care field, whether is h.i.v.- aids or a malaria. >> as you were asking your question, i was reflecting o a lengthy conversation i had with then-senator bill frist of tennessee, who was a medical doctor who introduced legislation to create a global medical corps that would provide a funding stream and process for doctors and other health-care providers to go overseas, a la the peace corps, to provide that kind of support to host countries. unfortunately, the legislation, for reasons of cost, never

really got off the ground. but i suspect that in time this topic will pbably emerge again. i will say this. when i was director of the peace corps, we established the peace corps office of global -- the global aids office of the peace corps. we have been applying for funding which the director has done a great job of implementing and maintaining. i as ambassador to the un dealing with food policy had the opportunity to visit countries were people who were living with aids, who are on medication, also have to have, as you probably know from your training, a certain nutritional balance in their lifen order to sustain themselves and basically to stay alive. i do believe, and people are starting to write about it now, that we are headed in a direction where we are building a demand for the future that is people living with aids at advanced age. that are going to require more

treatment and oversight for the treatment. we may have to shoulder an increasing responsibility for it. that may create an avenue to create the kind of discussion you have talked about. this is a topic that is starting to emerge because we are being successful in the global aids program in. the result is that more people are living longer. it is sustainable. it requires medical oversight and care. that is an issue we will probably hear more about. for your question, i wish we had a better answer. >> into all for being here, first of all. i am brian moore. i am returned peace corps volunteer for three and a half years. i am also one of the lucky peace corps volunteers who was able to marry a host country national. my country director thankfully signed off on it. otherwise, i would not have been allowed to marry my wife. i am also a student of international development here. south the secretary as well as director williams -- and you

mentioned the concept of diversifying the peace cps as far as volunteers go, as well as strengthening the volunteer profile. their ability to make change. how does that fit in with a lot of the bills that are being looked at in congress, or the varieties of bills in congress as far as more peace corps? just sort of to paraphrase development guru [unintelligible] he said, "certainly, more is better. but better is also better. and more is even better after better is better." how is making a better peace corps reconciled with making more peace corps? >> director williams, and also director [unintelligible]

mentioned increasing. i am not that sure i support a really big expansion of peace corps, because i really emphasize -- i really think it is important to emphasize the quality of the experience. and we do have times when voluntee arrive on site and things are not ready. part of that is because they are serving in very difficult countries in which there can be political change. we understand allf that. but i think the quality of experience is very important for the volunteer, for the host country. it is their responsibility to provide meaningful employment that will ensure that volunteers are really being tapped well. first of all, congratulations on your marriage. that is wonderful. this is ather role within the peace corps. apparently, peace corps volunteers cannot get married while they are in service unless

they get a sn off from the director. is that another sacred cow that needs to be revisited, director williams? [laughter] >> sure. was that glenn fricke tt you quoted? i think better is always better. the peace corps experience in the future needs to be a growth in quality. we want to make sure we continue to provide a quality experience for these remarkable americans who want to serve. we are using the money we receive from congress to invest in training, to invest in providing better staff oversight, and to invest in an ivy -- an i.t. platfor that allows us to connect volunteers worldwide so that we in -- so that when we in -- when we discover a best practice we can share it around the world.

there is no doubt about it that my staff and i are focused on trying to get it better, and providing quality experiences for the volunteers. i think those are the kind of investments we want to see. it is important for the future of the peace corps. we need to have a quality program in our expansion. >> i am christopher. i was a peace corps volunteer in guinea a few years ago. i was interested in the comments made earlier about the changing of the terms of service or the duration of service. i would love if that could be expanded upon at some point in more detail, perhaps by director williams. my actual question was more to the question or idea of improving peace corps. the question was inspired in part by the comments earlier about looking to the future and recognizing what peace corps was and celebrating for what it was, but also looking in terms of how we can transform it or keep it abreast of what developing

countries need today. i think when peace corps was created in 1961, it was evident that sending over young american college graduates, recent college graduates, was a commodity that we had. we had something that many developing countries lacked. that was an expertise that was needed. today, i wonder if that is still the case. i wonder if in many developing countries sending over primarily young american recent college graduates is going to be in the best interest of those countries. i think we would all say it is in our best interest as americans. it gets us involved in foreign policy and international development aspects of what is going on in our world. but i wonder if the future of the peace accords to look toward creating -- rather than taking teaching jobs, moving toward a technical support role. that would involve attracting

people with more experience, perhaps graduate degrees, people with more work experience, and putting them inositions where they can hope the government at a higher level make more substantial changes, or helping them develop their policies in a way that would affect our people. >> i would just offer this. director williams has a more contemporary perspective. >> we established -- as an mentioned, they opened the first program in mexic mexico made clear they wanted a different kind of a program in technology, science, environmental protection. the average age of the peace corps volunteer in the first group of volunteers who went in -- i can tell you they were definitely not in their 20s. there were north of 30. probably both were north of 40. these were men and women with master's degrees in science is, public health, environmental

sciences, and what not. then i had the opportunity to visit with them and to see their program. it was a totally different type of program than what you are accustomed to. that was the type of programming the mexican government was seing from the peace corps. earlier tonight, the direcr was telling me the mexican government was looking to expand the peace corps and introduced new areas, though probably someone nontraditional for peace corps, but representative aware the peace corps could go in the future in some areas and some countries. >> i am going to inject a lite controversy in here. is that ok? we have tried to -- the director tried that. paul coverdale and i tried to do that in the 1990's by expanding into the former soviet union. you are a returned peace corps volunteer, are you not? if you feel strongly about ts issue, talk about it within the

returned peace corps volunteer community, because they are a very important constituent base for the director. i listeneto them all the time. i would hear from them all the time. when paul coverdale went into eastern europe and i subsequently went into the former soviet union, because of the compelling events of world history occurring at that time, there were some peace corps volunteers that did not agree with that. you are very much a part of a discussion as to where peace corps volunteers go, how the resources are being deployed. these countries who were more sophisticated, had more literate populations, wanted for skilled volunteers. but it was hardo maintain that. after a certain time, the mechanism of peace corps tended

to recruit younger and more inexperienced candidates. there is an institutional issue here, where the institution have to change to recruit in a sustainable, long-term, permanent basis, more skilled at volunteers. i am thinking of the secretary of labor. very, very important part of that discussion. >> i am going to ask for two more questions. i will ask for them to be brief. i will take a question here and a question up there. ask them quickly, and then we will -- >> my name is todd schweitzer. i am a first year public policy student from the kennedy school. i just got back from the dominican republic as a peace corps volunteer in june. >> i commend you on your decision.

>> thank you sincerely for coming to speak. thank you very much. it is amazing. my question pertains to peace corps response, or crisis core. whent was founded, it was started, and is now under the leadership of director williams. can you comment on the division you originally had four prices court and whateace corps response looks like today and where it will be? >> let me get one more questio and we will take them both together. you do not have a question. we can take one more question. >> my name is greg. i am a senior at the u.s. coast guard academy. my question is for director williams and everybody else. you identified change agents as being a product for the united states in terms of sending abroad. what has been done for peace corps in terms of identifying change agents in the country's you go to, in terms of saying this is a member who can make substantial change for the country going forward, and

providing resources to do so? thanks. >> u.s. about the decision to create the crisis court. i want to talk about the extraordinary values. >> the history, of course, as alain said, was listing to so many returned peace corps volunteers, who would reflect on their years of service, very much want to go back, but were frustrated that their lives are organized and somewhat cumbered. , another 27 months was unthinkable. if the world needs the skill sets of peace corps volunteers. while they might have been lacking a lot of experience when they first went in, coming back later in life, language skills, cross-cultural skills, cultural skills. there was a group in the united states of returned peace corps volunteers unlike any other. the theory was to change a little bit. change is hard in an organization. there is no question. it was a change of the link of

service, my opening point, looking a little bit to peek under the tent of other transport. -- of other variants with the returned community. i think the skill sets are different. i think the theory was to be responsive to needs, to tap the rather unique skills and attributes and attributes returned peace corps volunteers could bng to an area of crisis, but in way that is less than 27 months. i have been pleased with its progress to date, the difference it has made. >> just 30 seconds. i salute the director for the vision he had to establish crisis core. we deployed crisis corps volunteers to assist after the tsunami in tremont corp's -- sri lanka, thaand we tapped into the crisis court in a way that had never been

done before after seeing the devastation of the tsunami and katrina. we deployed peace corps crisis corps volunteers for the first time on american soil. the response from the volunteers lit up the board with hundreds of our volunteers who said, "send me to work down there." i support the organization. >> today, the crisis court is now called the peace corps response. if we did not have the peace corps response unit at peace corps, which would have to invent that. we need to be able to respond quickly to emerging opportunities that present themselves. we have en able to go back into sierra leone and c olombia because we have peace corps response. we had returned peace corps respondents ready to go back into haiti 48 hours after the earthquake. this demonstrates the resilience and interest of the returned

peace corps volunteer community. it is important. i applaud mark for doing that. it has really been important. when we see an opportunity to go into the country, whether we have been there for a while and want to go in in terms of a new program, we have a tool we can use to pvide experience up from talented volunteers with thlanguage skills of the country. i also want to answer the question the gentleman asked me from the coast gua. had we find change agents in countries where we work, where they can make a difference and have an impact in their country? that is one of the things to constantly search for in the countries where we serve. we are trying to identify the best organizations and the best leaders of those organizations so we can get peace corps volunteers to assist them in their role of making a difference in their society. there is nothing more important. there thousands of peace corps stories about volunteers to work with individuals like that who ended up being leaders in their

countries in all sectors. this is ongoing and important from day one, from 1961 on. we have been looking for change agents and continue to support those important individuals to make a difference. men and women who can make a difference in terms of development. >> we have to bring this panel to a close. please join men thanking the panelists. [applause] for a wonderful, wonderful time. thank you. [applause] thank you. that was great. >> thank you. good job. >> stop by and see me, ok? [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] >> this week marked the 447th

anniversary of the assassination of president kennedy. today we'll talk with two former secret service agents whose job was to protect the president on day and mr. blaine's new book tonight on c-span's and a. >> now a group of republican governors offer their advice to some of their newly-elected counterparts. among them governors haley barber of mississippi, bobby jindal of louisiana, chris kersy of new jersey and tim paw lenity of minnesota. they spoke at a recent governor's association meeting in san diego. this will be about a hour. >> governor tim pawlenty of minnesota, governor mitch

daniels of indiana, governor bobby jindal from louisiana, governor chris christie of new jersey, and governor bob mcdonald from virginia. in the midst of them is somebody that probably doesn't need any introduction to you i will. and bill is probably one of known as a great communicator, especially on our side of the aisle. he has been an author, a communicator, hosts his own television show, was secretary of education under ronald reagan, and we're thrilled that bill has taken the time to be here with us. would you welcome our moderator, dr. bill bennett. >> thank you. [applause] >> are you kidding? you're thrilled that i'm here with this lineup? i'll spare you. not dined alone but i was once in the room with ronald reagan

and margaret thatcher. after a minute they said the children will leave. we have work to do. this is a thrill and a great and exciting day for me. when we came on you might have noticed the sequence. christy barber bennett that's a power sweep coming around the side. a new fashioned look called bulky chic. we're a great and diverse party and a big party. michael barone, the guy who makes these big studies of elections said this may have been all things considered the biggest republican victory ever when you lock at what happened. in the house and senate federal level, the governors, wonderful new group of governors we have here and the state houses. extraordinary victory. two years ago i remember haley barber said get your chin up. don't look at your feet. get your head