i am just wondering if everyone, not just the united states, is creating a lot of expectations in terms of what is going to happen. and what it does not go through or there is fraud involves an dags of what will happen in those terms? if you're not only creating expectations but affecting the outcome by not just your cells but activist experts encouraging, you are encouraging and away. >> i am encouraged -- we are not encouraging and a particular outcome. >> the assistance you would give to the country if the referendum which would co the runway. he is a creating expectations on the ground? >> i do not think we are creating reality on the ground about their attitudes and which way they vote. i think people by and large are

doing contingency planning accordingly. but it is not because we are promoting it. all the indications are they are, but we have to see how the vote comes up. i do not consider anything in this project update accompli. then you have to have that judgment that it was carried out properly. and as i mentioned, there are thousands of observers who are going to give their report as to whether they found it reflected adequately the view of the people, there enough, of very important panel in this regard is a u.n. panel headed by former president, because they speak to you in. their judgment on this process will be very important. it is a referendum. it is not an election we have

lots of complicated ballots and a lot of critics where you have a lot of complicated ballots. it is a yes or no, secession or not secession. it is a sample ballot. so far the observers are now running into a lot of problems. we are optimistic that it is coming off well. -- are not running into a lot of problems. we are optimistic that it is coming off well. we have to have acceptance not only by the government of sudan but internationally. the african union is very important in this regard. it has historically not like to sing country split apart in africa. they feel it is the stabilizing. it is an important decision for the african union. the fact that they are lending so supp -- so much support to the negotiations is very important. they are sending their own observers to the referendum as well. then we have all the subsequent

issues. i think these must be very tough negotiations. i think it will be very tough. when you're negotiating issues that top and have an underlying feelings with historical resentment, it will be a tough period over the next six months. [inaudible] if the government wants me to stay, i will stay on. i think the u.s. will be heavily engaged. >> no, i think he is right about all about that. it is not a fait accompli, but this is the last page of a peace process that was saying in 5. peoplejanuary 20005 have been building up to the

point where they would be allowed to participate in a referendum to determine their future. prior to the signing of that agreement in kenya in 2005, north and south sudan had been locked in a bitter civil war for the past two decades prior to that. some to 10 million people were killed. -- some 2 million people were killed. if there is and expectation about the importance of the referendum and the moment, it is the basis of the fact after two decades of fighting, 5.5 years of an interim arrangement, that they now have an opportunity to bring closure to one of the darkest chapters in their history. for those in the south who have suffered and who have believed for many years, decades, that

they were second-class citizens, and for those in the north who also wanted to bring an end to the civil strife that has slowed down the development of their country and cause did -- costed it international respect as a result of some of the practices during the struggle, this was an extraordinarily important moment for the people of southern sudan. this is an extraordinary important week for them. but if there is a sense of expectation, it is built over period of some 2.5 decades in which we can now are on the very cost of seeing one of africa's want -- long as wars and long this tragedies. the ambassador is correct of what is ahead is extraordinarily difficult. it will require patience and

methodical negotiations against two parties who were once bitter enemies but now stand a chance of being two states that can live with dignity and respect side by side. but we have to get through these issues. we need people like ambassador lyman to help us help them work through the complications of citizenship, wealth sharing, borders, distribution of wealth, and national assets. these are very difficult questions. they are difficult for a country which is losing 33% of its population, a quarter of its land mass, and it is difficult for the government only five years old in the south that comes out of one of the poorest regions in the world. difficult -- we have to work with both sides. we do have an opportunity to

help advance the cause of peace in central africa, and in the sudan, but it will not end with this referendum on saturday. in fact, it closes one phase and opens up a more challenging one. [unintelligible] >> the status of the ida? >> the referendum could not be arranged in time. the issue now remains to be resolved how to go forward, and there has been no agreement between the two sides. president mbeki has been working very hard on bringing the two sides together run as. the two presidents have met twice to discuss it. but they have not reached agreement. do you go back to a referendum or an alternative solution? there has been no agreement.

it is an important one to get resolved. >> thank you for joining us today. this concludes the briefing. >> in a few moments, an update on the condition of arizona representative gabrielle giffords. in all little less than a half- hour, the sheriff and 2 cents, clarence a definite, talks about the shooting there on a radio program. after that, patrick leahy on his committee's agenda for the new congress. later, a final report of the commission looking into the gulf oil spill. >> on television, on radio, an online, c-span bringing public affairs to you. created by cable, it is washington your way. >> the doctors for every of gifford says that she is breathing on her own, following several commands, and requiring less sedation. there were relatives of other

shooting victims. it is about 20 minutes. >> good morning and thank you for your attention. i'd like to take this opportunity to. the citizens of tucson and everyone else in the country and the world sending out their thoughts and cares. it is very much appreciated. i do not want to get our long into this but i want to put out a word for the people in the hospital, everyone in the entire hospital, from every aspect of the healthcare system, they are doing a great job. i could not be more proud of the group of unified people.

we would to a couple of things and then i will update you on the patients that we had in hospital. then i will introduce you to two additional physicians who will make a little statement. this time period. first of all, we are currently six patients remanding in hospital. one in critical condition, three in serious condition, and to in fair condition. one is in surgery right now, another had earlier today. their additional searchers planned today. everything is going as expected. no issues or problems at this time period. i know if you want good update on the one patient remains in critical condition in the ico, the congresswoman. i would introduce dr. lemole. >> i will update you on congresswoman giffords' status. she is holding her own. she is still following the

simple commands. we have been able to pack: some of that sedation. and that she is able to generate around breath. she is breathing on her room. the only reason we keep that he is to protect her air way so she does not have complications like pneumonia. at this point, a lot like to take you through, if i could, the step-by-step process that i did when we first talked about her operation and her immediate. operative care. this is the face of care where we constantly say, it is weak, month-to-month. i know everyone wants to results every day. as long as we did not backslide and she holds around, that is good. that is helpful. we have to play this according to hurt timeline, not ours. we have to avoid the frustration that so often her family will feel, we as doctors will feel, and all of you will feel. she will take her recovery of her own pace.

i am very encouraged by the fact that she has done so well. this kind of injury, a penetrating injury to the skull, the survival, let alone recovery, it is abysmal. she has no right to look this good and she does. we are hopeful but i want to underscore the seriousness of this century and the fact that we have to be extremely patient. >> as you know, the congresswoman's husband is an active duty navy personnel who is an astronaut. the entire availability of the military has been made to is. we took advantage of that scenario and situation and act fast to people to come here and give me a consultation and advice as to what we could do in addition to what we were doing. these are world famous people. dr. james ecklund, the retired

colonel from the united states army. he has served with distinguished honor during the war in iraq, and probably the most experience with penetrating trauma in the united states. currently he is the chief of surgery over at inova, fairfax. then geoffrey ling, a colonel with active duty as well. he is an import specialist in the country at this time. he worked at the military medical school. colonel ling was on his way to afghanistan when he was able to come here and give us an in-depth view and did a consultation on the congresswoman. they looked at all the affirmation available to us and it will make a brief comment and we will do your questions and answers.

>> it has been and our privilege to consult on congressman giffords' case. everything we have seen reflects the highest quality of care. dr. rhee seems aggressive and dr. lemole says that the surgical intervention saved her life. the care is equally outstanding, providing the ottoman bring healing. we are inspired by her husband mark and the staff. we join in on america's hopes and prayers for congresswoman giffords and her family. >> allied to take a moment to reiterate in important point that dr. lemole was tried to share with you. this is a very serious injury. make no mistake, i she was shot. the bullet did enter her skull. the bold bid traverse through

her brain and then exit out the back, leaving behind fragments and bone. she is critically ill. but the good news is that she is in fact writing under the very good, excellent care happening here at the university of arizona. however, it is going to be a process now where recovery is in fact dictated upon her own recovery. that is going to be a process that will take some time. it will be day by day. i believe with all the support that she is getting here at the hospital, as well as the support from the community here at large, both here in tucson and the united states, we are all very hopeful. i want to reiterate -- she is very critically ill from a very serious injury. >> thank you. this is a devastating problem that we have, the number one cause of years of lives lost,

how does cancer and anything else you can think of. it affects the young as well as the old. there many people that are injured in this unfortunate circumstance, every single day. i know that we have one particular person that we are always very interested in. but there are many sides to this story. other human beings involved from every aspect. with that, we have several additional people that we will make available to the staff here. angela robinson and penny wilson, daughters of the person discharged yesterday. and also bill hileman, her husband is undergoing surgery yesterday. so we will go ahead and excuse the decisions out of here. we will start with the first

family. you can read after statement if you like. and the leaking of the questions and answers. -- and then we can go to questions and answers. >> that you for being here. we have been hesitant to discuss this. our statement as a family or for four sons as well as our family, we would like to complement the hero in our father. he is with the lord now. what a way to go. as a hero, he lived that kind of a light. i also think that this time of love to say that it brings the hero out in all of us at times of tragedy. differences do not matter in families, whether divorce, single, in between. as a school counselor, i know that families have to come together no matter what. it is time where we join hands with a good hand -- could have

ball and find a hero in all. each party -- we need to make the next arrangements and go step-by-step with what happens next with that. just veryre appreciative to everyone who stepped forward during the tragedy. as it went forward, there were so many people to thank. there were people on the scene that sat with our parents, prayed with them, held them, help to them, as well as everyone -- everything else. there are volunteers they were organized as well as on organized volunteers that step in immediately. the hospital staff, the fbi, everyone has been extremely helpful and we appreciate that. my mother is doing quite well,

actually. she has strength and courage and wheat -- and she will go forward. she has a long life ahead of her. she is resting and we just appreciate everyone. >> thank you. >> i like to introduce bill element. he will make a few comments as well. >> my wife suzy was apparent that took christina taylor green to this event. we have been here since 2006. my wife and i were fortunate to be able to take two years to look all over to find a community we wanted to be part of. tucson was where was elected, feeling it was one of the most natural melting pots of america the wicked ever find. this event is shocking because of that. -- that we could ever find.

this event is shocking because of that. at the initial shock of getting the call from an anonymous woman telling me that christina had been involved in an accident. one of the first people that i met was the minister who heard the news and walked in off the street, not part of the staff, comforting people. that is my tucson. another woman held my hand and said a prayer that has been influential in giving my wife some good luck the first day. she was operated on saturday by the truck acerbated trauma surgeons. she had been hit three times by bullets. thankfully, spine and organs were all intact. her biggest issue on an ongoing basis is a fractured hip being addressed today today as we sit here. there have been heroes involved in this from day one, including those good people in the

emergency room who dealt with this emergency and chaos, but looked to the feelings of all of us so on knowing as to what was going on, to every nurse, every orderly, every doctor we have met so far. i am so impressed with the quality of care we're getting from this institution and the quality of people, how they operate in the care that they take of the sensitivities of us going through this. suzie will be fine long term. i'm not sure if she will be quite as active football for physical activities for a while. we will watch her for three months and then serious physical we have after that. she is a tough, strong woman and a survivor. the greens remain in our prayers every minute. they are dear, sweet friends of ours who had been did go trying their best to take care of us despite the loss that they have suffered. the graciousness that that

couple has shown is unlike anything i've ever experienced. beyond the safety of my wife, i'm most often prey for the greens. -- i most often pray for the greens. >> they will open up for a brief period of questions and answers. >> are you sure of the direction of the blog? >> there is an entry and exit 1. we cannot be particularly sharp. we want to be nebulous about that. we do think from the expertise they are giving to us, it may be when in the front and came out the back. [inaudible] >> we were speaking with your pastor yesterday.

he had spoken with your mom. he felt that dorwan had saved her life. >> absolutely. he heard the shots and covered my mom with his own body and protected her and say to her. yes, mom definitely felt that way. >> that is because dad -- mom to not know she had been hurt. she was holding him and it was not until she got to the hospital that she realized she had been shot. the most beautiful way to say that -- goodbye and go home. [inaudible]

>> susie and christina were holding hands in line waiting to hand.ake gabby's they were there because my wife is very active in the community that she lives and. she had become, when the greens moved a half -- to town, roxanne are reached out for babysitters and your workers' and susie was the one that answered the e- mailed. they linked up and became quite good friends. in that process, they were as spired -- espy -- we are aspiring grandparents with kids that are not married yet. their generation we apart but very much sisters. . christina was elected to her student council and expressed interest in government, my wife had been a social worker in new york and chicago, and is of that

ilk and she started looking for an event that they could share, as they have done a number of other things. event made so much sense as much as my wives of the consensus as well as a positive female role model for christina. they were together holding hands. most of what suzy has shared with pain about the specifics are on the edges of a more thing-induced haze. there has not yet been made clear, precise discussion. in moments of discomfort, things come up. she is remembering and having flashbacks and uncomfortable moments. i do not feel prepared to date to put together a cogent timeline of exactly what her -- what occurred. i hear her in her samite conscience ramblings screaming,

christina, let's get out of here. she keeps talking about holding of hands and the realization that she was on the ground and that the bleeding was profuse. her memory seems to and there. >> does she know what has happened to christina? >> one of that first impressions from this institution was when i was pulled aside by a social worker, and the toughest issue would be dealing with what happened to christina. again, by white has worked in and with families who have had tragedies in her entire social career. in her clearheaded state, she is quite understanding that this was the act of a madman and blame does no good for anybody. but we have dark moments as humans were the inevitable occurs. we will have that as an ongoing issue to deal with. i wanted to make sure everyone knows that to the extent that

mindset since then, it is not induced by anyone at all involved. and certainly by the greens, who the morning after the incident, roxanne sent us a link the e-mail. john and i had been playing telephone tag until yesterday, but we got together and cried for about 10 minutes. oh, i'm sorry. susie had a breathing tube removed late saturday evening. the very third thing she has, she looked me in the eyes and said, what about christina? it coincides with knowing that there is no right way to deal but to tell her the exact truth which we have done. i was initially happy she was full of more thing. it may have helped the burden. -- full of morphine.

she is only coming out of the slowly and i do not know for sure all of what that is being absorber at this point. >> she and christina were holding hands when they were shot. >> this is a very distressing time for you. and your family. what thoughts to you have the the man accused of doing this? >> we are not when they answer that at this time. we will let god take care of that. >> can you tell us about life with your parents before this? >> they met 15 years -- marrieds 15 years ago. there were six great boyfriend and girlfriend. they had a wonderful, loving live together -- they were sixth grade boys fretting girlfriend.

they have a wonderful, loving life together. they were married 15 years ago. sixth grade girl friend important. >> both of them had been married 40 years to wonderful, other inmates. when their mates died within a year apart. my monument -- mime mom move back to tucson. the rematch and married shortly after. it has been a blessing for all of us. in tucson. >> they were both very good friends with each other's cousins. carolyn and jack reintroduce them and they decided to be boyfriend and girlfriend again for the rest of their lives. >> we are sisters.

penny wilson. >> i am angela robinson. [inaudible] >> yes. >> i am mavy's daughter. but i am claiming him as my daddy. >> they will be available for further detailed questioning, if you want. ok. [inaudible] >> mom has been very aware of what has gone on from the very beginning, i think. [inaudible] >> yes.

she is very grateful, very aware of what is going on, and the kindness and the sheer outpouring of support for everyone. >> we heard that dory was a volunteer the church here. he fell off a ladder or something? >> dory was a very busy little guy. anything that was broken, was going to break, he was always thinking about how to fix and repair and help anyone and everyone that he could. he was always available for that. >> i am getting the signal so we'll wrap this up. i appreciate everyone's cooperation for you guys have been fantastic. it took a lot of courage from the family members to do this. so thank you very much. >> more now about a weekend

shooting from tucson share of clarence dupnik. he was on the radio program for about 20 minutes. >> the share of the pima county, a longtime friend, we have been mired in for his work in law enforcement and for speaking his mind. thank you for being with us. we appreciated. >> thank you for the opportunity. >> please explain to this audience across the world as well as southern of a project arizona some of the law- enforcement duties. we talked with someone tomorrow who may press charges leading to a local investigation of the shooting. perhaps the division of responsibilities of law enforcement, if you will, sheriff. >> well, we had two a very serious crimes of murder. one that is federal and one that the state. the judge and the shooting of gabby are federal crimes.

the other individuals who were shot, and the staffer also, so what we have is the fbi being responsible for the investigation of the federal crimes. we have our department, the sheriff's department, responsible for investigating the state crimes. i can tell you that within an hour, a very chaotic scene, there are about 5 -- no, seven or eight law-enforcement agencies, four from the federal government like the fbi are present, there are five municipal jurisdictions, including the city of tucson and our valley -- our department and so forth. several fire agencies including the city of tucson, and a lot of

medical and emergency support people. within an hour, a very chaotic scene was brought under control, a command post was set up, and an incident commander was in charge. it was as if one agency was doing the entire investigation. the people of this community, the enforcement agencies have practiced and practice and work together for years. this one came together as if it was one agency doing the entire thing. in a you've seen acts of heroism and situation somewhat similar. i don't know if you've seen so many people risking their lives. the elderly lady to grab the gun magazine. the two men that tackle the killer. daniel hernandez, who cradled the congresswoman in his arms and held a bandage to her head as much as he could, makeshift, to stop the bleeding. if the elderly gentleman throwing himself in front of his wife.

his wife ciba -- like a safe. the mother pushed herself in front of her own child. we are a community of mad people. it could happen again but we are a nation and a community of heroes. >> that is a fact. i am sure that you and everybody who is witnessed or heard of this event is some detail at this and thought. what what i have thought had been at that scene? in fact, when we learned that when people are confronted with a threatening situation, the autonomic nervous system takes over and people either fully or the fight. there were four brave people who decided they were going to fight. and they saved numerous lives because he had just finished widget finished firing 31 shots from an extended magazine that he had. he was trying to extend -- in search of another extended

magazines. plus he had two other magazines. he probably had 60 other rounds and he probably would have used those, had not been subdued. >> no questions or comments following this terrible tragedy. you've talked about the rhetoric and the political talk and the political climate. you never backed off of that even though you have been criticized. you talk about a mecca of prejudice and bigotry. some of ask you to send your remarks but you have not. >> no, i was expressing my anger. i still feel the well. i still feel that way. i've learned about this when i was leading palm springs, a law- enforcement event when i learned about this. it was like someone had kicked me in the stomach. i was in a stake of -- state of shock, disbelief. the more i learn, and that two, the people that i admire,

respect, and love the most were victims. then i got morose and quiet and then i'd started getting angry. the clothes arrived at the tucson, ariz., the angrier i got. i arrived about half an hour before the press conference and i could not help myself. i decided i was going to say what i thought. no, i believe it. didn't the political climate may have contributed to the slaughter? >> there is no doubt in my mind. i think millions of people feel precisely the way i do. and i know that there are thousands of police officers that feel that way. but everybody is afraid -- for example, the national rifle association. they are afraid of the legislators. they are afraid of what the government may do to us, to them, and you were in the legislature yourself. you know the power that those people have a. people are reluctant to say

anything controversial because of the backlash they are going to suffer. i have been a cop for 52 years. i am 75 years old today. i think it, maybe it is time i can express myself. and there is blow back from this. one representatives say that you bear responsibility for the tragedy. you should of had a share of that that event. >> that is an interesting point. it is a point right now being discussed intensively not only here but in congress. when there people like gabrielle in congress, in washington, they have tremendous security. all of the sudden they go by into their communities, and they have seven or eight events in one day. and we do not even know that they are having these events. there is no law enforcement people present, unless we have some intelligence it is one of the problem. >> she'd never asked for security and never notified

where she was to be. it is never been checked with your office as the public events? >> if you're feeling guilty, you reach for straws. >> one senator says that he takes exception. it is not a political issue, it is a mental problem. the share of ought to stop and think. -- sheriff off to stop and think. >> there is no doubt about it. for years, some talk radio hosts, which certain people listen to, 24 hours a day, seven days a week, and some people on tv has said their motive to inflame the citizenry. for whatever purpose, they make a lot of money doing that, and there is one party that benefits from it. >> clear channel have taken down limbaugh billboards that set straight shooter. >> he has no responsibility,

right? >> you handle the situation where everybody should evaluate what they are and what they say and what they did. a lot of people see this is all lull before the storm. and there's no qstion about it. there are people out there that are unstable and you cannot reason or control them. their behavior is irrational. people are trying to figure out this individual's motive. it is trying to rationalize what is irrational. you cannot do that. i think all of us know as a matter of common sense, that when you inflame people, particularly troubled personalities, that those troubled personalities may do really bad things as we saw in this case. >> we are on c-span and across the country. you are in tucson, arizona. we're with the sheriff of pima county, clarence dubbing. your comments quickly. >> i wanted to share to know that i support his statement.

happy birthday. i support your statement and i feel strongly about the gun laws and. the legislature was to put guns at the university. i think it is a very stupid idea and that we need to do something about it. >> rick is a caller to our show. >> good afternoon. i think sometimes we take ourselves so seriously that we lose sight of the important part, we have a bunch of victims. some of been so devastated because of these crazy things. as a community, i wish we would focus on helping these people transition into being survivors that they can become examples of the way to do things right instead of bashing each other over the heads of politics. life is too dam short. and thank you for your call.

very quickly. >> there is no question. there are acts in legislature today to protect the privacy of those that will bury their dead in tucson, all six. the quick action of not only republicans and democrats and the legislature, but the governor to sign this legislation. these people coming from topeka to disrupt these services. >> is this same that it takes up a tragedy like this to get the republicans and the governor and the democrats on the same page. it should that happen along time ago. if these people show up in may by like this law, they will spend some time in our jail. >> you're calling for a consideration of the political rhetoric that has been so much a part of our discourse. no one can suggest that in the ratchet up the political feelings and tucson, as well as the attack on ethnic studies.

now they are having an attack on the 14th amendment. there's no doubt in your mind that this is unhealthy and may have contributed -- i almost as you the same question -- you think it could a contributed to this madman in these acts? >> i did not think it is just me. all the experts in the field of sociology and psychology agree with those things. it is not just the tonic. >> very quickly, and i appreciate the time, you have these interviews from all the country. in the past year in pima county where we set, in democratic representatives gabrielle giffords' district, we have seen up 45%, of mental health services in this congressional district, in southern arizona. this is something we've talked about many years. it is a mosaic of things that create these kind of

environment. the idea that to identify someone who may be a danger to someone else and you cannot do anything about it until they harm other people, seems to be an odd quirk in this society and the structure by which we live. >> sometimes in the legal system that we had, common sense gets lost. to and that is what has happened here. >> that is exactly what has happened here. going back to europe when bank about the tenor of our society, and you look at gabrielle's campaign which i was involved in. you have sarah palin in the cross hairs and the reload, publicly supporting her opponent. her opponent is going tv, and you saw those commercials that start out with -- i know you people are mad as of washington. so am i.. that was her opponent. he had one event that i know of where people were allowed -- he

showed them how to shoot a semiautomatic rifle after the event if they wanted to. >> the association of done in politics has led to this horrible tragedy. you cannot separate that from this event and from this got awful tragedy. theire fighting for lives. we have a legislature so willing to come together and trying to protect the privacy of those being buried, but the majority committed to open them guns on the campuses of the arizona universities. your response to that, putting guns in the hands of students. >> the legislature ought to stay out of this. we ought to let the college officials and presidents decide how their campuses around. in the idea is insane. you put a bunch of guns in

students pockets and teachers pockets, and when you get an unstable personality, that suddenly becomes angry about something, they have to reach in their pocket start shooting. >> the idea that you might limit these gun magazines. 31, and a few years ago, you could not have a clean up. illegally you could if you could acquire them but he could kill and when so many in such a brief period of time because of falling of that magazine, its capacity. your comments on some gun- control in america. >> politicians are fearful of their jobs because of the influence of the national rifle association. >> you're not careful. you won seven elections. you're the most popular political figure in southern arizona. you never been seriously challenged for share. -- for sheriff. you talk about going to the ballot in letting people decide. >> absolutely. >> take some time quickly and i want this audience at

nationwide and in the southern arizona to know your relationship with gabrielle giffords. it was not just friendship or political alliance, but it was a deep, and friendship. >> not only fringe ship, but that deep admiration and respect. this is one of the finest creatures that god has ever created. really. i say -- i do not say this to exaggerate a point. and john roll, the federal judge assassinated, he had been a personal friends for many years. is the guy that went to mass every day. he is the fairest, brightest judge that i know of. it is just horrible. to sheriff, we will go through this together. you were so close to her and now so close to this whole situation because of the continued circumstances such as

this one where we ask you, what do you think and what will happen. this has been a very difficult time for you. in a very difficult, and hopefully some good can come out of it. there is a national discourse on this issue of anger and hate and prejudice in our society. it is time that we as a nation decide we're corn to stop this. i think we need people, could leaders at the national level, to take this issue up and make recommendations on how we can bring some of this to a halt. i realize that there is free speech that we have to deal with, but i think that free- speech does not go without responsibility and consequences. >> sheriff, thank you for being with us. about a long four days. sheriff clarence dupnik. will come back and add some comments for you. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national

cable satellite corp. 2011] >> the c-span networks -- providing coverage of politics, public affairs, nonfiction books, and american history. it is all available to you on television, radio, online, and on social networking sites. view our content anytime at the c-span video library. we take you on the road with our digital content bus. it is washington your way. the c-span networks -- now available in more than 100 million homes, created by cable, provided as a public service. >> next, senate judiciary chairman patrick leahy on his priorities for this session of congress. he also commented on the arizona should improve from the newseum in washington, d.c., this is all little less than an hour.

>> i want to welcome you all here and senator leahy. he has been here a number of times, i think because we have the biggest first amendment sinon the world. right out there with all 45 words of the first amendment. senator leahy is such a champion of the first amendment. he cannot go by pennsylvania avenue without looking at it. we appreciate you coming back here today, senator leahy. in this very room, president obama held a town meeting. the week after next, the supreme court justice breyer is going to come here to talk about matters of the judiciary and public issues. it is a delight that the

newsuem to serve as a place where the members of the executive branch, the legislative branch, and the judiciary branch in come here and hold civilized discourse about public affairs, about the media, about the things that abydos, and the things that bring us together. it is in that light that the newseum is delighted to welcome senator leahy today. i am going to turn the program over to the dean of the georgetown university law center, welcome, bill. [applause] >> it is a pleasure to be here. our speaker come at it become a

tradition to begin each new congress with a report on the upcoming priorities of the senate judiciary committee which he chairs. the georgetown university law center has been proud to play a partner in role and chairman leahy's others and we are especially place and see is one of our most distinguished alumni not only did he earned a law degree in 1954, but 30 years later, we were pleased to recognize his service with an honorary degree. in the united states senate, patrick leahy offers a unique combination of experience, expertise, and currency in some of the most significant issues of our day. he is a blend of old school and new school. now the second most senior member of the senate, he also continues to lead on cutting edge technology issues. as the "new york times" have dubbed him, for is enthusiasm of

the internet. he has that passion for civil liberties, the devotion to the rule of law of a former prosecutor, and the enthusiasm for technology of a 16-year-old. [laughter] he is often held congress bridge the gap between security and privacy, taking the lead in writing checks and balances into such laws as the communication assistance for law enforcement act and the first and second patriot act. if patrick leahy was elected to the united states senate in 1974. he remains the only democrat ever elected to this office from vermont. at 34, he was the young this united states senator ever to be elected from the green mountain state. a graduate of st. michael's college in vermont, he received his j.d. from georgetown university and served for eight years as state's attorney in a can county where he gained a

national reputation, and in 1974, he was selected as one of three outstanding prosecutors in the united states. he has been a champion of an independent judiciary and open government and the public's right to know. the son of a month per earlier printing family, in 1996 he was installed as of freedom act hall of fame, and the is one of only two politicians ever offered an award. he has partnered with republican senator john corn and to offer several improvements, including their open government act, of 2007. he was also the lead sponsor of the protection act which addresses flaws in the capital punishment, and in 2004, he offered provisions of law to require dna testing and better access to competent legal

counsel to ensure that innocent people are not executed. long known for his work on congressional oversight, he led the judiciary committee's 2007 investigation into the massive firings of u.s. attorneys and the political influence over a decision making. he is voted on the nomination of all current supreme court justices and he oversaw and chaired the hearings of the last three confirmations to the court, justice sotomayor, and justice kagan. he is also a member of this agriculture committee and his long cochaired in energize the work of the senate national guard office in its efforts to modernize and adequately equip the modern national guard of today. he has three children and five grandchildren. his home is in middlesex, vt., where they live in the 19th century farmhouse in the midst of their farm. senator leahy. [applause]

>> dean, thank you very much for the introduction. it's hard being away from the farmhouse, but charles, i thank you in your superb staff. hosting this discussion means a lot. you and i have worked together on these issues over the years. i must admit, when i started preparing this speech, press: and others in my office, we were talking about it, things change. over the weekend. we can talk about the tragic events of these past week and for a moment. they call us to reflect on the parlance of our democracy, and our responsibilities as

beneficiaries and stewards. as we enter this beautiful program today, many of us passed by these magnificent words of the first amendment. charleses' carve them into marble on the facade. their 74 feet high. congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or their right of the people peaceably to assemble and petition the government for redress of grievances. parents used to say that everything we needed in a democracy is in there. it promises diversity, practice any religion or nine if you want, to speed can be protected by your government in your speech. that guarantees diversity. you guarantee diversity, you guarantee a democracy.

the day before she was in the attack, congresswoman giffords, a member of the house of representatives, whose role was to recite these words on the house floor. in a free society, the society that we americans must always want our country to become a government should not and must not restrain free expression. but we learned this children, with freedom comes responsibility. couple flowering of democracy relies on the self restraint of each citizen, organization, and group of citizens. the blog post and the twitter feed all have the power to inspire, to motivate, and to inform.

but they also have the power to inflame and in sighcite. the seating rhetoric has gone too far. the demonizing of opponents, of government, of public servants, has gone too far. our politics have become incendiary. we all share the responsibility the temperature. that is a responsibility to keep our democracy thriving. the 535 members of the house and the senate have been at elected to represent more than 300 million americans from all walks of life. we have responsibilities within our borders, but we also have responsibilities outside our borders. as our nation charts its way into complex and often very dangerous world.

it is time to stop polarizing and to work together on the substance of the many challenges we face as a nation. otherwise, our country, a blessed, bountiful, expansive nation, which survived a revolutionary war, a civil i cannot accept that. neither should anybody in this room. you know, i am the only democrat elected to the senate in vermont history. i was introduced that way once shortly after i was elected.

he carried every state except maine and vermont. shortly after that, franklin roosevelt came to vermont. my father told me the story. across the street from us was the national life insurance company. president roosevelt went by in an open car and my father was standing next to the president of the national and everybody wore hats. the president went by and the head of the company took his hat off and held it direct my father turned the women said, i never thought i would see your -- you take your hat off for president roosevelt. he said, i tip my hat off to the

president. think about that. we should show respect. the sheriff was in every man for this tragic moment. we need to work together for the good of the country and the american people. after oklahoma city, after the horrendous a tax of 9/11, we came together. we need to come together again. the tragedy is -- on common ground. it is easy to appeal to resentments, distressed, and selfishness and hate. leaders should appeal to or better angels. one common ground remains

elusive, we must respect the rights of others to express their own views and beliefs. one more thing -- we must not allow any assault on representatives of democracy to succeed in thwarting or meeting people's access to the elected representatives. i am committed to work with the new chairman as well as the president and the attorneys general as we face the problem confronting our nation. i look forward to working with the new ranking republican. we served together since he came to the senate in 1981. we know the value of bipartisanship and civility. i began meeting with the senator last month. i will make sure they include those that are important to both

of us. we have taken a keen interest in -- the first bill we considered last congress and one of the bills we signed into law by president obama was the recovery act. working together, we also strengthened and we made sure that taxpayers would be protected from fraud. in the new congress, we need to build on that progress. i will focus the first hearing of this congress on fighting fraud. on our january 6 -- 26 tiering, we plan to learn more about the recovery of more than $3 billion of taxpayer dollars in fraud actions by the department of justice in the past fiscal year alone. that is our taxpayer -- tax

dollars coming back into the treasury. the administration has been a partner and our crime-fighting efforts. we want to make sure that the new provisions are having the intended effect. i can tell you that these kind of investments will pay taxpayers back many times over. americans are worried about their budgets at home. we need to protect their investment. fighting fraud and protecting taxpayer dollars -- these difficult economic times, we need to continue that. of bipartisanship. we also have to talk about focusing on american jobs. last year, the senate judiciary

committee unanimously supported bipartisan efforts to stop online criminals from stealing our nation's intellectual property. it cost the economy billions of dollars every year. barring -- our intellectual property based businesses are one of the most productive in our economy. they are part of our best sources of export dollars. we cannot stand by and see them ravaged. we cannot have americans consumers subjected. we will renew our efforts on this this year. among our top priorities is the patent reform act. this bipartisan initiative to modernize our patent system has received considerable attention in the last several congresses. there are days i feel that i

hold schedule revolves around that. we have been updating our antiquated pat and system will keep america -- patent system will keep america the forefront of innovation. it protects jobs. it does it without adding a sense -- a cent to our nation's deficit. he agrees that patent reform is sorely needed. again, this is something more democrats and republicans can work together, can help the country, and help lower the tension. we work together over the years in confronting anti-competitive business concept, especially in agriculture. the last two years, the justice department has become more aggressive in protecting competition.

competition -- this is a very interesting thing. we will build on that as we talk about the concentration and agricultural businesses. i hope congress will finally repealed the health insurance industry's exemption from antitrust laws. there was bipartisan support for that in the last congress. there is no place in our market for anti-competitive abuses. repealing this antitrust is a good way to start. it is in the health-insurance market. there are many ways in which the committee can help our economic recovery. we can strengthen programs.

it encourages foreign investment, spur is job creation. i would like to see foreign money come in here to create jobs in the united states more than american money going abroad and creating jobs in other countries. we will look at how we can move forward toward immigration proposals spurted ways to approve of the subprograms. -- ways to improve visa programs. there are some good economic science finally. democrats and republicans should be working together on these measures. the american people expect us to work together. the american people expect us to make the country better. -- we have also

seen the last decade encroach on america is privacy. there is no other decade in our history imperative of security, the proliferation databases, the spawning of interactive social media combined with earlier expectations about having the choice to be left alone. i will tell you a story. one of the few things i have kept -- is friend of my wall. -- it is sprayed on my wall. it is a short piece on that profiled me. we live on a dirt road.

the family has known me since i was a teenager. it is saturday morning, and at a state car drives up and sees the old farmer. he says, the senator live up this road? the farmer says, are you a relative of his? he said, no, i am not. are you a friend of this? not really. is he expecting you? never heard of him. [laughter] we believe in our privacy. in the digital age, a time darkened by the threat of terrorism, we face a difficult challenge of protecting the nation's. we encourage american innovation and we respect privacy rights. the jury committee will continue to work to of state electronic communications privacy act.

i want security agencies to have the tools needed to keep us safe from cyber threats. i also want to have federal privacy laws to keep pace with advancing technology. this is not an easy balance. i think it can be done. we will examine several emerging privacy issues and a growing concern to me and many americans. including the invasive full body screening and our airports. the tracking of americans activities online. i want to work with the obama administration with senators on both sides of the aisle to revisit the communications assistance to law enforcement act. it bridges law enforcement needs with citizens' privacy rights. i remember writing that law in their early 1990's. we cannot even have imagined that it has changed.

we have to update the law. we have to have the same consideration we had in the 1990's. balancing privacy rights as well as a legitimate need for law enforcement community to gather valuable court ordered surveillance information to keep the nation safe. the aftermath of 9/11, we passed the patriot act. i am pleased that attorney general walter agreed to implement the civil liberties oversight and reporting improvement i suggested. it is a good solid step forward. we have to take the next step and extend certain provisions of that act that are slated to expire next month. there is another area in this annual reports.

chief justice roberts recently wrote about the urgent need to fill the federal decency -- federal judiciary vacancies. they have reached historically high levels. that resulted overburdened courts. litigants' are unable to have their cases heard. i will try to work with the senator and the senate leadership of both parties to lower those vacancies. unfortunately, this is another instance where private -- partisanship has been a destructive influence. we need good and capable women and men to be willing to serve as judges. to protect the rights of all americans and appalled blog -- and uphold a rule of law. we cannot to ask people to take on the public servants -- service of judge ben expose them to accumulating delays in the

process. we can protect our national security and our constitutional liberties, but it takes care and foresight. this is not an area where we can use symbolism. we go to substance. do we want to be saved? do we want to protect ourselves? of course we do. let's be honest. it is going to take work to have that balance. at a time -- we need care and foresight. we continue to face the threat of terrorism and violence. the american people expect us to do no less. the government of the people, by the people, for the people must be accountable to the people. we need a commitment to vigorous oversight and government transparency.

when we can join together, republicans and democrats, -- a conservative republican from texas, he is joined with me over and over again to strengthen and expand the freedom of information act. we share the view that open government is not very democratic issue or a republican issue. it is an american value. we will continue our productive partnerships. i will reintroduce the act, a bill to establish a bipartisan commission and improve the implementation of. we will do that later this year. you also have to do it by example. i will pledge that the proceedings of the committee will continue to be web cast, available to all americans in real time. like internet access to

hearings and business meetings. i know it works. i get back to my office and there will be a call, what did you mean by that? the important thing is that it is open. it is a special honored to be at newseum on pennsylvania avenue. i am the son of this paper publishers. we drove down today and i thought how my parents would have loved the idea and the reality of this great museum. i'd been mom and dad would have embraced the incidents -- indispensable work of free speech and a free press. do not ever stop. it is so easy to argue for censorship for just this one

issue or just this one issue. no. open, free debate. i think the constitution project for their interest. review in the judiciary committee's priorities is becoming a tradition. i like this kind of traditions. just last week, members of the congress were sworn in, pledging to uphold the constitution. with its new term comes a responsibility of governing. as john f. kennedy said, to govern is to choose. i served in the majority and

minority. three democratic president and four republican presidents. i know that we can be productive. i worked with republican house chairman. i worked with the republican senate majority and republican president to extend the voting rights act. to enact the innocence protection act, which provides dna testing for those wrongfully convicted. i look forward to continuing this tradition. this is a new year. this is a new congress. the year started in a very tragic and troubling way. every year is a year of promise for america.

in our committee, we have a challenging agenda. we have the challenge with some of the most capable members. we pursue the goals and make good artist a more perfect union. i thank you for listening to me very sad -- to me. [applause] >> he will be glad to take some questions as time permits. he will take questions from the audience. many of you may have asked questions -- past questions to the aisle. ok. questions from the press? >> thank you, senator.

in the wake of the shooting at fort hood, there was a push by the president and others to withhold judgment about the man's botas and intentions until more was known. however, in the wake of the most recent shooting, there was no shortage of accusations that the two-party or talk-radio was behind motivating the individual. why is there the lack of caution on this particular incident? >> the president withheld judgment in the first situation. it implied that he did not in this instance. the president has taken the same position on both. he has withheld judgment, as he should. i prosecuted lot of murder cases. i have arrested murderers. i withhold judgment until the

evidence is in. the president has done this in both cases. president obama is right in doing that. it is a heinous crime, terrible crime. i want members of congress to be able to meet anywhere in this country with their constituents. this is part of our open government. the ability to petition congress, to speak to congress. i do not want that to change. let's find out what happens. let's not get a tragedy mixed up in politics. the president has not and i have not. i am more interested in finding out what was the motivation of the person who has been arrested. my heart goes out to the families of those who love lost members, a nine-year-old girl, a

husband who died protecting his wife, a super qualified member, a highly respected member of congress fighting for life. those are the things we should be concerned about. >> the first question from the audience, do you believe cyber security legislation will move ahead this session? >> thank you. i think cyber security legislation has to move ahead. we are losing billions of dollars because of the fraud on the internet. a lot of it is from overseas. we pay -- are real questions of

our security. so much of what we do is done via computers and internet. think about the heating systems when it is five below zero in the northeast or other parts of the country. think of the devastating consequences of a cyber attack. think of the billions and billions of dollars counterfeit goods are sold and many of them coming from overseas. people have lost life savings. people have had their bank accounts and their credit relent. -- relent. -- ruined. my guess is that if we can -- i am working with governments and with industry, with users, consumers. i am trying to bring them all

end to make sure that everybody is that the table. i can guarantee that if we read the most perfect bill this year and pass it, it a couple of years, we will have to revisit it. i want to write a bill that can be updated. the types of problems that we are seeing and the types of attacks is amazing. >> we have two more questions from the audience. the first concerns patent reform. you're a minute to the pop reform act was seen as a strong and widely acceptable compromise on a complicated issue. you mentioned your conversations with their house colleagues. police star with a blank slate? >> -- will you start with a blank slate? >> when i began working on padded reform, i had hair. [laughter]

i do not want to go back to a blank slate. we have done an enormous amount of work. we have brought an end -- we have brought in every state culture. -- stakeholder. we have had countless meetings with all the stakeholders. we have worked with the patent office and others. i think the bipartisan legislation we put together is a good step and it is a good place to begin. i will not start with a blank slate. i will work with both republicans and democrats in both the house and senate to try to have a good solid bill or we can begin. if it comes to the floor of the senate, it will pass. i would like to do it now before we get tangled up next year with

presidential elections and everything else. >> a few more questions. what do you anticipate the senate will do in reaction to disclosures by wikileaks? >> i wish i knew the answer. i know the justice department has already had subpoenas' out. we have been revealing what the law is. -- revealing what the law is. -- reviewing what the law is. i believe in an open government, but i do not believe in putting good men and women in danger. we have had to bring people out of other countries where they were serving at great risk to their own lives, serving to protect your safety, my safety. they were very valuable in doing

that and we have had to remove them from those countries because they had been exposed. we have seen people in some countries who have faced the death or have been killed because of that. that is not responsible. i will also ask the obvious question. i had lasted so many times in my office. what in heck do we have all this material or a private to first- onto could download it cds? who made that can -- and of made that decision?

-- who made that decision? >> what are the specific plans they considered to strengthen eb5? >> it is a program where investors are able to come from overseas, invest in businesses in the united states and they move forward in the immigration process doing it. that is the shorthand to it. it is being used in many places. it has been used very effectively in my state. there been some questions whether it has been misused and other places. in most places, it has been used well. i think it should be made a permanent program, but with some very specific oversight.

government and congressional oversight to make sure that it does best -- money comes in to the united states, creates jobs, americans are being hired for those jobs. frankly, as an american, i would wrapped -- much rather see money coming from outside this country coming in and creating jobs. >> we have three questions on the nomination process. the first is -- what did you schedule for nomination hearings? when will mr. -- when will the atf nominee will likely have a hearing? >> especially those who went through the committee unanimously last year.

they should not have to go through it again. i do not know how you ask someone. you put them through a humiliating to lead. i am urging all of us to back away from that. the president has gone across party lines. he has saw the advice of republican senators and democratic senators. we have to get away from that. i will put on the agenda very quickly those two of already been confirmed. the president sent most of those names back to us. we senators are dependent on our

staff. they do the work. we will get them through. there are so many vacancies. we had 85 district courts with vacancies. 16 circuit courts. first president bush's two years in office, the democrats were in charge for a year-and-a-half. in a year-and-a-half, we went through 100 of its judges. i just happen to have these numbers here. [laughter] we were able to put through only about half of that, just over half of that.

we have to get away from that. you have good men and women who are willing to serve. let them do that. be a judge is a prestigious office. it is a very hard working office. it does not come without risk. as we saw this weekend. >> the final to questions also concerned delays in the process. what can be done differently to speed up the confirmation process for judges? the delays in confirming federal judges to a tragic toll. meetttended congresswoman's and greet. what will the senate judiciary committee to do -- due to honor his memory?

>> that was a leading question. [laughter] i am going to both democratic and republican leadership and say, this is a new congress. what's that back. let's do something similar to what i did in my first two years. let's move judges through quickly. we will have been heard in in committee and they will be confirmed their carry it if you have somebody who has been confirmed unanimously, the tradition has always been -- you

take 10 minutes of debate equally divided and to roll call them. they go through unanimously. i want to get back to them. let's have a debate on them. and then vote. but vote yes, vote no, do not vote may be. >> we have time for two more questions from the press. >> you were the target of an attack in 2001. i am wondering if you could talk about whether that attack or this one will change how you interact with constituents or other senators. >> i had an attack on myself shortly after 911. i received one of the deadly

anthrax letters. people died because of letters addressed to me. i still wonder who sent it and why they sent it. i will wonder that for the rest of my life. for a period of time, the capitol police were superb, providing security. i felt i really did not need it. i felt totally safe in my state of vermont. it is this a this state in the nation. i know our local and state police in vermont have procedures for public meetings. i am very satisfied with what they are. i will not go into the details for security reasons. the capital itself is very, very secure.

when i think about what it was like at law school, all the doors were open. it is a little bit different today. i did not feel any worry being there. i would not want to see every member of congress walking around with security. we have the obvious ones. i have no problem with that. i would not want to see members of congress walking route with security. read it is not the kind of country we are. i've been -- it is not the kind of country we are. i have been to a totalitarian countries. some of these countries, to visit and they are surprised that i drive to -- in my own car. i want to keep it that way. it would be a mistake if we put any more barriers. the one place we can be

ourselves is that home. i want that to continue. the country is better off if we can. i would urge, i really would urge -- i urge this for the right and left. everytime you disagree with somebody in public office, stop attacking their motives and describing some sort of nefarious motive. we have good men and women across the political spectrum who represent people in this country across the political spectrum. there are no easy answers to the problems facing america. there never have been. there were not any easy answers during the great depression. we had men and women who came together to stop the best interests possible to make this

a better country. don't we owe that to our children and grandchildren? step back from the rhetoric. go to substance. start working together. this is a great and wonderful country. we are a beacon to the rest of the world. let's make sure that this began as a little broader than it has been. r than it has been. >> should there be more talk about gun control? >> there will be, but i do not know if it will change. that is an easy answer. vermont has the lowest crime rates in the country. it doesn't have gun control. but i would not want those laws

-- vermont laws to be in an urban area. we have to figure out what works best. thank you. i really appreciate you being here. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> and a few moments, the final report of the commission looking into the gulf oil spill. in an hour, new jersey gov. chris christi state of the state address. after that, the annual address to the legislature by indiana governor.

>> we have several live events to tell you about tomorrow. tim geithner speaks at the school of advanced international studies. that is at 8:30. the census euro releases more information about the 2010 census. that is at 1:00. at 8:00, we have live coverage of the memorial service from tucson for those who were killed in saturday's shooting. speakers will include the president. >> there is a new way for you to follow congress with congressional chronicle. track the daily court time lead and read transcripts and find a full video archive of each member. it is part of c-span video library. >> the commission investigating the gulf of mexico oil spill is

calling for more funding and training for oil industry regulators and raising the liability cap for damages caused by an oil spill. the final report was released at a briefing that lasted a little over an hour. >> we were given several charges. what happened? what can we do to mitigate the prospects of it happening in the future? what is the future of offshore oil/gas drilling in the united states? i am very pleased that we are submitting the report. we are submitting it on time, under budget, and with unanimous vote of the seven members of the commission. we began our efforts six months ago with a trip to the gulf.

we thought it was important to hear the voices of those who led been most affected by this tragedy. i would like to recognize the distinguished service at the extraordinary work of the commission's staff led by richard. with pride bartlett as the head of our investigative team. we performed under a tight schedule. a great public service for which we are extremely proud. i would like to give a brief overview of our reports and some of its findings and then i will turn the podium over to my colleague and co-chair, mr. bill reilly, who will address the implications for the industry practice and the future of

offshore drilling. there is a fundamental fact that the oil and gas off our shores is an american assets. it belongs to the people of the united states of america. the federal government has a dual role -- it is a regulator for banks such as safety and environmental protection and it is also the landlord. we own this property and have an obligation to respond with the public trust is abused. a fundamental findings of our six months investigation is that the deepwater horizon disaster did not have to happen. it was foreseeable and preventable. that fact alone makes the loss of the 11 lives and serious injury to others and enormous

damage that the explosion caused even more tragic. for the past 20 years, there is been a rapid movement by the oil and gas industry to deeper and riskier areas of the gulf of mexico. this move but has generated abundant revenues for the private company's plans for the federal treasury. industry has been proud for its technological advances, which have been compared to those of the space program. the federal government has benefited by the increase in revenues. what happened during that 20 year period, however, is that we became world into 8 cents of inevitable success -- a sense of inevitable success.

on april 20, after a long period of rolling the dice, our luck ran out. our investigation found significant errors and misjudgments by three major oil drilling companies. bp, halliburton, and transocean. this culminated in the disaster. these errors and misjudgments are described in detail and the chief counsel's presentation which was made in november and which would be the subject of a separate report said to be issued. they range from failures to properly interpret warning signals that resulted in key tests not being properly understood and late stage design decisions. taken together, we conclude that these mistakes amounted to a

significant failure of management. it is important to emphasize these errors, mistakes and management were not the product of the same goal broke company. we believe -- rogue company. how did such a situation come to pass? how could it be that such questionable practices could take place when mistakes -- when the stakes for so high? i am sad to say that part of the answer is the fact that our government let it happen. our regulators were consistently outmatched. the department of interior lacked the in-house expertise to effectively enforce regulations. it was also an internal conflict of interest within the department of interior is old

minerals management service. it was a service that have the responsibility for collecting revenues, the second-largest source of revenue into the federal government, second only to the income tax. and did have the responsibility of providing an effective management of safety and protection of the environment. those two conflicting irresponsibility is, as we heard from three former directors of mms, consistently led to a revenue trumping safety as a priority of the department. we recommend, therefore, that congress and the administration create an independent safety agency within the department of interior with enforcement authority to oversee all aspects of offshore drilling and safety. we believe this agency should be

headed by an individual with a background in both science and management who should serve a fixed term in order to be insulated from the inevitable political influences that will attempt to affect the decisions. we also recommended bringing our offshore drilling regulations into the 21st century. it is not asking too much that our approach in the united states be at least equivalent of the best practices in the world. they are not that to date and sadly, the united states had one of the lesser records of the safety of its offshore drilling practices. the second piece of this modernization approach is called risk-based regulatory orientation. this requires all offshore drilling companies to

demonstrate that they have thoroughly evaluated all the risks associated with drilling a particular while. one of the realities is that it was thought to be an unusually risky area in which to drill. high pressures, many unknowns about the geology. a company with one of the worst safety records received the least and the entitlement for access to that area. april 20 was the consequence of that convergence of those two unfortunate facts. our investigation has also demonstrated that science has not been given a significant seat at the table. i think that is a considerable understatement. it has been virtually shut out.

we need consultation with those who have the expertise, a scientist but in and out of government, experts at agencies like noaa and the coast guard. these are the kinds of people who should play a major role in evaluating specific permit request and the operation of drilling rigs. it is disturbing to learn that the march 2010 decision to expand areas to additional drilling india granted an eastern gulf were made without appropriate scientific input about potential consequences of those expansions. we hope that the changes that will flow from our recommendations will avoid a repetition of that. i will conclude my remarks by making a simple and obvious

point that is often forgotten when we talk about offshore drilling. these properties belong to all of us. they belonged to the people of the united states of america. it is our government's responsibility to shore that exploration and extraction occur in ways that are beneficial to the country. drilling offshore is a privilege to be earned, not a right to be exercised by private corporations. the american people have a say in how it is carried out and whether they want -- and they wanted to be done safely and effectively. our recommendations offer a path to the destination. much is changed in the months since the blowout. we other day great deal about how to contain spills at deep water. industry as a new appreciation of the risk associated with offshore drilling and the federal government has initiated

significant reform in how it oversees this risky industry. the commission applauds all these efforts, but they are not enough. drilling offshore is inherently risky and we will never reduce the risk to zero. as a nation, we can take concrete steps that will mitigate the chances of another and reduce the consequences should another event such as that occur. the commission believes that these steps are all vitally necessary. without such a response, we will continue to plague -- place safety at unacceptable risk. it's dramatic steps are not taken, i am afraid that at some point, in the coming years, and other familiar will occur and we will wonder why did the

congress, why did the administration, why did the industry, why did the american people allow this to occur again? the people of the gulf have suffered so much that they deserve to know that their governments and industry are going to and are committed to the highest standard of safety and protection of the environment. thank you. >> thank you, bob. i want to recognize that one of our distinguished members, dean of engineering at harvard, it is ill today and could not be with us. she understood in ways that none of the rest of us do the specific technologies and the engineering realities that helped us explain what happened on april 20. i want to also emphasize that this report is unanimous.

it came in under budget and on time. i understand that is the first time in the history of commissions that anybody has not asked for more time. i was told by one member of congress that this is something we shootout at advertising take credit for another one said wheat said based terrible precedent for washington. -- and once said that we set a terrible precedent for washington. this has been an enormously satisfying enterprise. the report has the quality that it had ended it completed on time is a tribute to the marvelous staff led by a the professor. senator gramm has characterized what happened on april 20.

he is explain the bad decisions, the blunders, the inexplicable -- the inexplainable choices. he also talked about the cause. a culture of complacently that affected both government and industry. i think the reality is that none of us were prepared for this. obviously, government and industry shirt -- certainly should have been. if not for the catastrophe, a major spill. the early response to that spill is evidence of the degree of on preparation. this commission is critical and harsh about some of defaulting early efforts to get a grip on the problem. having said that, having visited the gulf, i have to say that

there is something very impressive about the response. tens of thousands of people worked day and night to try to clean it up. they may have incurred cost of time and energy and help, but they did the job. our leadership of the government, i think, after a slow start, responded quite effectively. in the case of determining the flow rate, with considerable ingenuity. make no mistake about it, despite some allegations, this 's katrina.ma' coun we'll identify gaps. to congress, we say, it is time to exercise serious oversight.

over the department of the interior and the euro of oceans management. oversight that has not been characterized by a previous congressional responses. we recommend the resources be allocated by the congress to ensure that this agency is capable for the people they are regulating every day. they have not been. they have been overmatched. they have been under resources and underfinanced and undertrained. money is going to be necessary to add to the efforts under way by the secretary. they're going to have to get resources from the congress. they will have to have a compensation system that allows more recruitment of able people

to understand technology. but congress needs to act. we get a lot of questions about whether congress will pay attention to us. one congressman was paying a lot of attention yesterday when i briefed him based upon the verbatim speech that later came from him. we can take some encouragement from that, i think. the fact that the building operation is going to take time points to one important reason why industry which will continue to drill needs to pick up its own game. we make a very important recommendation. the recommendation is based upon the experiences of other high- risk industries,.

one thinks of the chemical industry. it established responsible care. one thinks of the nuclear industry after three mile island. there are other examples. the oil and gas industry, which may have not been a high-risk industry in shallow waters, has become so when it has moved into deeper waters. it needs to move into more obvious consequences. i have heard from ceo's at companies who dislike, who are revolted about the painted with the same brush, companies that have exemplary records for safety and environmental

protection. a fully understand that. i served on the board of such a company, conocophillips. what we say is that the likelihood that dependency upon contractors who vote -- cooperate and virtually every one of the world's oceans were carbons are mined are most likely at risk as a result. in order to believe that this is not a systemic problem, one has to believe also that halliburton would only have supplied faulty cement to bp or that, trans ocean, on any other raid, would have detected-risin gas rising e pipe. halliburton and trans ocean are operating in all the world's

oceans. it is indisputable that the solution to the problem busby industry-wide. industry has to stop thinking -- the problem must be industry- wide. several companies, quite outstanding compass, presented their safety and management systems to the commission's staff, meeting at which i was present. at the conclusion of each of those meetings, do not think that it occurred to any of us what they were not doing, what should be done now. nevertheless, i asked the question -- how did you manage the risk that your race might all be shut down in the gulf? to that, they have no answer. they need such a question for the future. industry the forces -- that an

force's best practices and grades the performance of the various companies is what we recommend. we encourage the most exemplary practitioners of the safety and environmental protection to lead the rest of the industry. i know it is a complicated industry and more complicated than the nuclear industry. it is also technologically very capable and will finance. -- and well financed. a tragedy like this does leave us to be open to new directions. we have long known that the resources in the gulf of mexico are up profound value and consequence. two-thirds of the fish left in the sea are nurtured at some point in their life cycle in wetlands.

louisiana has something like 30% of all the countries wetlands. they are silently eroding away. they are disappearing because of hilbert rise, but because of also flood works, dredging, and generations of oil and gas activity. for a long time, we have no one needed to be done there. there are many projects, many authorize, that are standing by for support. for the first time in my career as a conservationist, we have the prospect of serious money to do what needs to be done. if the fines and penalties that are to be assessed are deployed 80% police to their restoration, the country owes that to the gulf and a very much hope congress will agree to appropriate those funds and direct them toward the gulf. as secretary mavis also recommended in his report. finally, the problems that we

confront in energy and in the oil and gas industry are like so many in our mental problems. we cannot solve them alone, as a country even. the gulf of mexico is shared to a very large degree with mexico. they are intending to go deep water within the next few years. cuba has also shown interest in putting out wells. i have had conversations with the mexicans, as has secretary salazar, about their need to enter into agreements with the united states and hopes that cuba can be drawn into this conversation as well so that all this practice the same level, have the same standards, the same protections as our industries go about mining those resources. the trip -- the same is true of the arctic. the arctic is a punishing environment. it is beset by whether the like of which one does not see in the gulf, except perhaps in the

kitchen of a hurricane. it will require special care and attention and the kinds of standards and regulations that are effective in the gulf will not be sufficient in the arctic. russia, canada, norway, denmark has already begun last summer to drill two wells -- all want to develop those resources and so will the united states. many to the special care as we do so. -- we need to have special carries reduce so. we need common standards for protection and management going forward. those are some of the highlights of our recommendations. they are by no means all of them. we believe that, if these recommendations are followed and the course we have set up is taken, we will go long way toward restoring the faith of the country in a vital

enterprise. thank you. >> as you pointed out, the oil and gas industry, when operating in shallow waters, it is not a high-risk industry. some of the energy industry have complained that the reason they are drilling a 5,000 feet of water in the gulf is that the government has barred the drilling in shallow water areas of the atlantic and pacific coast. with the commission recommend or did you discuss the possibility of getting the shallow areas open so they do not have to go into deeper waters? >> we understand fully that the notices to leases 5 and 6 are requiring some attention and the certification of equipment has a backup. there are necessarily some adjustments that will take some time before full resumption of

drilling occurs in shallow waters, as well as in deep waters. senator gramm and i have been crippled the moratorium which we thought was excessive and lasted -- have been critical of the moratorium which we thought was excessive and lasted too long. the plotters were the oil is. if you look at the reserves estimated to exist, they are not only in the deep water, they are in the deeper and deeper water. we are where the plans to go down 10,000 feet. to the extent that the oil and gas is in deep water, that is where the industry will go. not just here, but brazil and other parts of the world as well. the arctic is not the border. it is shallow water, about 140 feet where shell wants to drill. that will present its own problems. fundamentally, this is a

problem that can be managed and is it -- and it is in the interest of everyone for government and industry to manage it. >> you hinted in your speech -- you said that this was an industry-wide issue. you have examples of where mistakes are being made right now and are they being made in u.s. waters and where are they being made? >> the commission did not document these problems and other places. we are aware of blowout preventers that do not work. but i would cite just one statistic that is indisputable. the fatality rate for 100 million hours of work in the united states is five%. in the north sea and in europe, it is 1%. that needs an explanation. it points to a problem.

i think it points to a system- wide problem. >> as early as last week, jack girard, the president of the american petroleum institute, said that he felt that the american people believe that the mcconnell was an isolated incident. as you know, there is significant resistance on the part of industry to creating the kind of safety systems that you call for. on the government side, congress, last year, tried to pass an oil spill legislation that contained a lot of the things that you have called for. that legislation went nowhere. what will you do to make sure that your report, as thorough as it is, is not ignored by both congress and industry? >> we will make a lot of noise. we are testifying before senator bingaman on the 26 of january in

the morning and doug hastings in the afternoon. we expect there will be more tension to the kind of thing that we suggested, which really is a very detailed research. we do not say really what we do not know here. we do know that this is a systemic problem given the pervasiveness of the contractors, the great manager owners, the largest in the world, halliburton, which is operating virtually everywhere, servicing the oil and gas industry. the listing would say that is direct lee -- which is directed to to say -- i do not want you to say or think that issue will not support this. they are deliberating on the possibility. i have every hope and expectation that they will in fact establish one.

>> the secretary of interior recently relaxed environmental reviews for a number of offshore deepwater drillers who have already had their permits prior to the accident. what was your response to that? >> immediately after the spill occurred, all the companies that i am aware of stood down and assessed their own exercise, their own activities for vulnerabilities. mms then investigated, inspected each of the company'ies that wee shut down. they found seven or nine violations. they were corrected. i think the secretary's decision is a sensible -- is the festival. >> if i could to supplement what bill has said, one of the underlying themes of our report

is particularlity. we are asking for evaluation in terms the riskiness and consequences of that risk in that particular field as it relates to the moratorium. it was our feeling that, rather than through a blanket all of the 33 who were affected by the moratorium, it should be evaluated on a company-by basis. company mechanics were shown to be in compliance with the higher standards that have now been established and they should not be held back because there were others who had failed to comply with those new standards. i believe that is essentially the policy that the administration is now taking.

>> you talked about the idea to create independent safety meetings within the department. you talk about funding and condensation. can you tell me where the funding is coming from and if you have a timeline or specifics on how quickly would like this established? >> one of the areas where i think that funding should come is through the lease itself. what is special about offshore drillings as compared to one sure where much of the drilling takes place on privately-owned land, all of the land of the gulf of mexico is public land that belongs to the people of the united states or, for those near-shore areas that belong to the people of the five gulf states. we believe it is appropriate that, in the decision to allow a

company to have access to that public land, there should also be provision requiring that company to pay a fee sufficient to cover the regulation that executes that lease. this is not a new concept. in fact, it -- the offshore oil industry is an allied air and regulated industries before the regulations in some form of a fee. we think that should be the case with the oil and gas industry and we believe that the lease is one of the means of doing so and in doing so in a way that would assure a sustained, predictable source of funds for regulation. this way, the top of competency is that bill has just described

can be met. >> can you talk about how the lack of subpoena power may have affected the commission's ability to look into particularly accountability-some of these companies? >> through the able efforts of our chief counsel, we were able to retain all of the information that this commission felt it needed to produce the answers that the president had requested, both in terms of determining the root causes of the explosion, but also making recommendations on how to prevent something like this in the future. that does not mean that there were not people that we would have liked to have interviewed. but we were able to very effectively obtain the information that was necessary for us to do our work.

i would also follow on something that both the senator and bill had said about the question over whether this was an industry- wide issue. what is not in doubt and what is not disputed is that the industry was not prepared for this. what is not in doubt is that, industrywide, r&d efforts have not been undertaken to address this sort of event. it was very clear that there was a lack of ability when this occurred for the industry to effectively respond and to contain of this event. it was industrywide in that sense. >> one of your recommendations deals with the liability cap for offshore oil spills, saying that is inadequate.

do feel that you have a range? why would you not of the cattle together as some in congress have proposed? >> we look at the question of liability and the recommendation is that the cap be lifted. we did not recommend that it would be lifted to an unlimited liability. we did identify that it has to cap shouldand the per be lifted as well. this is one of the things that does require congressional action. just to put a point on one of the earlier questions, too, there are many recommendations in this report that can be enacted by the end ministration. the agencies do have authority. as we call on congress to act and called on industry to act as well, there are actions set can be taken by the federal

government using existing authority to strengthen oversight and regulation and we are calling on the demonstration to do that as well. >> i am wondering if you can elaborate on the arctic and what specifically needs to happen. should there be a moratorium until oil spills and icy water can be cleaned up with proven technology? >> the commission is not asking for a moratorium in alaska. recognizing that there are very important questions still ahead for us to be answering through additional research and investment in the arctic- specific technology. we feel that research that has a specific time line and very focused research that will help answer the central question for both the private sector and the public sector is what is really required. another really important

recommendation as it relates to arctic development is that we are asking congress to fund the coast guard so that they are adequately prepared for, god forbid, an oil spill and for search and rescue in the arctic. as we see more and more traffic in the arctic, whether it is for tourism or navigation of any kind, it is essential that the coast guard, and for that matter the navy, has the ability to be able to respond in the arctic. forrestville to move fourth, whether in gas and oil development or any other element, we have to be prepared as a nation -- for us to move forward, whether in gas and oil development or in any other development, we have to be prepared as a nation. research in terms of the environment, the international protocols that bill mentioned earlier with other arctic

nations, additional investment in the coast guard, and i would add something that we have not talked about at this point, empower local people to be part of the decision-making process. after the exxon valdez oil were commissioned in alaska. we are recommending during something similar in the gulf of mexico to allow the people in the gulf to be active produce bins in the planning of oil and gas development, in training so that, if there is an oil spill, the they can be a part of the work force in a better prepared way. we recommend the same thing for the arctic. we think all of these things will better position the united states to be able to take advantage of the resources in the arctic. but we do not feel as though we should sit back and wait indefinitely for that to happen. we're challenging congress to put funding into both of the

research and the capabilities for the coast guard and other agencies so that we can move forward. >> i would appreciate it if you could explain or elaborate on why science has not had a significant seat at the table as senator gramm indicated. and what may not be the relationship between that and, for instance, the initial difficulties in determining oil flow rates and other problems where science might perhaps be helpful? >> the lack of understanding of basic environmental processes in the gulf of mexico were striking as a result of this incident. for example, there was a lack of confusion about whether the submersed the border plumes of droplets of oil. there was a lack of understanding where those plumes are going and what the effect may be.

the science can answer these questions. indeed, some of the first results of science that was conducted on this has been very revealing in a very busy any number of very important publications. however, the size to be most affected should be done in advance so that we understand that this is working in an environment in a very comprehensive way. programs have been oriented towards completing the minimum, identifying potential sensitive environments for development of environment investments rather than come presently understanding the fake and effect of oil and gas that might be leased in the system. our recommendations are to beef up the environmental studies program, to elevate it in terms of its independence so that is led by prominent and protective scientific leadership so that it can bring the fruits of the

research to bear on the environmental assessments to support the leasing decisions. part of the process involves no law and the usgs to work with -- noaa and the usgs to work with this development. as mr. reilly recommended, we also recommend additional investments. these restoration investments can only be effective if they are guided by the best science to directed to the priorities of restoring resilience to the system and to making sure that we're using the best methods to the outcome. both of those areas, in terms of the assessment of the risk of going forward, with respect to

oil and gas development, and as well as with restoration, we think that a scientific program is absolutely essential. >> nowhere in your report do you question whether the crime was committed. david allman says that a crime was committed under the clean water act and there will be a criminal prosecution of bp, halliburton, and more. do you think there should be increased resources for criminal environmental enforcement to help deter this kind of behavior? >> when we first met with the president and he gave us our assignment, there was an understanding that our purpose was to develop the factual

record upon which this event occurred, that it would be for others, specifically the department of justice, to determine if those facts constituted a criminal act and, if so, for what specific purpose? we did not undertake the issue of attempting to determine criminal liability. i will leave it to the leaders of the report as to whether they believe they can find it. again, our factual program -- nor did we look specifically at the question of the resources necessary to reach a judgment as to whether a crime had been committed. >> another question about the

liability, you say you do not recommend unlimited. there are proposals in congress that would seek a compromise would pull liability across the industry. but a trust fund already does that. why did you not recommend an unlimited liability, removing the cap entirely, and did you consider this pool concept where companies producing in the gulf would all pay into that? >> we do recommend a significant increase in the liability. we're sensitive to what we do not know. we know that canada has a much lower liability maximum -- i think $35 million. the united kingdom has won the is not much more. we do not really know that the insurance company address issues of liability were we to propose a straightforward industry or an insurance pool. there's a lot of sympathy for the fact that we have

characterized 185 independent operators in the gulf. the truth is that we did not have time to get into conversation with the insurance industry. we assume, although we do not know, that's some kind of an insurance pool can deal with the special problems of the independents. we have been clear in meetings with them that there is a concern to make sure they remain competitive for all the economic and cultural reasons that they represent. but it is also reasonable to expect that they can inflict billions of dollars of damages that will be billed to the public. our position on this one is close to the head ministrations and recommend a significant increase in the liability cap without specifying exactly what it ought to be. >> the question infers that

there should be a single number that covers all instances. if there's one thing that we have learned is that there is a dramatic difference in the risk and the consequences of that risk. the deeper and deeper you drill into dangerous and more ,eologically challenging areas one person not to be considered is that, if there is to be a liability cap, it ought to be variable based on the actual risk that a particular site could impose and it could be dramatically different for a well-known shallow waters as opposed to the unknown alter deep for which we are about to commit exploration. >> that raises the issue of the

safety case as a new mode of regulation. i do not expect that will become familiar very rapidly in this country where it has not been practiced before. a couple of companies already do use it in the gulf and it is required to be used in thewhat h company goes beyond that to assess those dangers and threats that are inherent in a specific well formation or rig design situation. the advantage of that is it puts a lot of initiative on the industry to focus specifically, not just to get the box is checked for compliance, but specifically on a given place with this particular challenges. one thing we hope it will do is avoid the prescriptions which may be perfectly applicable today and next year and the year after that, but given the rate at which this industry

progresses technologically, it could become obsolete. this would guard against that and we recommend the interior department promote that and that the industry which we know can operate according to it in the north sea to begin to do it in our own waters as well. yes, ma'am. >> whether the top priorities for congress you will recommend when you testify? >> the top priority is first of all give resources to the interior department to enable it to provide the oversight job that it has. secondly, to ensure that the majority he of the clean water act priorities go to the gulf restoration. and third, to lift the liability cap and address that issue so that any future spill that happens in u.s. waters, the public gets protected.

>> yes, ma'am. >> one question that has been raised. i am from mother jones magazine. calling for more time to assess the application. there has been arguments whether they can do that with existing authority, or whether congress has to expand the 30-day window. specifically whether there is any determination reached on that? >> our conclusion is that congress has to act in there's a specific recommendation to extend that to 60 days and mccartt stars running was the application is complete -- and the clock starts running when the application is complete. >> from the times picayune. you both thought that the moratorium was excessive. i don't know that that was the consensus of the rest of the commission. >> the commission never took up position on that.

>> have you square that with the finding of the systemic problems that could repeat? >> the way i would squarish is that the companies that had not been implicated in the specific spill and that had been specifically, carefully inspected by mms immediately following the spill were judged to be compliant -- in compliance with all known requirements. they had exemplary safety records already. over here. >> i am with energy guardian. did the commission discovered that the macondo well was inherently unsafe and should not have gone as far as it did in any case? it it should not have gone as far as it did. and at some point they said had abandoned the macondo well, that it could not be completed safely. >> i do not think that we conclude that. i am sure we did not conclude

that and that is not the opinion of the industry. >> as the well was drilled, the operator bp recognize that their work inherent dangers to go farther in drilling the well. and so they stopped short of the ultimate target and decided to complete the well there's then at that point name. there is every vote reason to think in terms of the investigation that the well could have been completed and abandon safely at that point and. there were however, a chain of mistakes and errors in judgment made as the one about the process. each of which could of been easily prevented. i think our assessment of the a investigative team is that there should could have been pleaded -- this could have been completed safely and come back and produced at some future time. there is however a recognition that as one trills of well, even with the best geological

reconnaissance information available, that the company will find unusual risks and challenges as they go deeper down the well. and so part of that is a safety case. to state that and says that in advance and a comprehensive way rather than being surprised as one goes down and trills the well. >> is, ma'am. >> i am with the l.a. times. your recommendations are coming out at a time when there is a serious energy regulatory sentiment in college -- and congress. you have been good enough to share the insights that industry have given you in private conversation. could you tell us, given the priorities that you will present to congress, what kind of reaction you have gone so far privately from members of congress to the recommendations you are making? i wanted to get some insight from you, given this climate,

where you expect to push back. >> i would say the answer is that there are 535 members of congress. there are close to that. i believe that this issue and the searing impact that deepwater horizon has had on the conscience of america is such that it will override an ideological preference for less government, less government intrusion, less government. what makes that level of optimism credible is the fact that members of congress understand that this is just not a typical example of government regulating the private enterprise. this is government regulating land that the government and the

people of the united states alone. -- own. and it must be treated as we are stewards of public assets, and valuable public assets. the gulf of mexico. that recognition will cause, in spite of the reticence to accept additional regulation, this to be an exception. second, as has been said, we think a substantial amount of the recommendations that we are proposing can be adopted without congressional action, as it is in the hands of, particularly the and talk -- the department of interior and the administration, to execute. from the commons that we have had thus far from the obama administration, i am very hopeful that that will take advantage of that opportunity. let me add tw of things.

congress can reorganize the department of interior to create an environment and safety enterprise come off totally walled off from revenue generation and leasing, without any money. that can be done. it is knowledgeable of all lot more regulation. that is a simple initiative that they can take and we think will be a guarantor in the future against revenue driving this program, which historically through several administrations we document that it has. the second thing i would mention is that chairman upton, chairman hastings, and chairman big a man all indicated enthusiasm for inviting us to testify before their communities -- there committees and expressed great interest in what we would recommend. we encourage -- we are encourage the congress will give this the kind of hearing that it deserves. yes, sir. >> i am with "inside epa."

talk about the recommendations for the epa. new response plans for federal agencies, was there any discussion of giving them a more robust upfront role rather than leaving everything would then doi? >> it has a national response center. it is a central role in research -- and organizing for any response. there are instructional changes that need to be made with the area wide council and so forth. those of detail than the report. one of the real surprises here is that having overseen much of the response to exxon valdez in 1989 in prince william sound, the status of the dispersant question was still unresolved. i did not permit dispersants to being used in many sensitive areas around the fish hatcheries and prince william sound because of fear of getting into the water column would have contaminated fish.

remarkable to me that we finally have spills. they are predictable, that will happen from time to time -- and we get into the conversation, is it toxic, are they safe the user? does a persist in the environment? does it depend how deep it is injected or how much was used? we make strong recommendations that if epa seriously began to test toxic -- the toxicity of dispersants and to do so in real time situation. i can perfectly well understand why, when an application may go into epa, to deposit some oil on the water and see whether something works to contain it or to dissolve it, that is probably not at the top of the in box. nevertheless it needs to be done and needs to be done a specific set of questions. we recommended it be done in the arctic to find that how dispersants would work in very

icy water. >> i should point out that epa, in addition to the issues that chairman reilly mentioned related to dispersant application and the role of oil spill response, have a major role to play in the restoration efforts and recommendations that we made and secretary mavis made. as you o where that the president asked for is a jackson to set up the task force and she is made progress in the interim basis. she is leading that effort with all the other agencies in the states. they will have a major role to play in restoration programs, specifically. one of those areas we. that is the alleviation of the cult -- the so-called dead zone in the gulf of mexico, which involves management and regulation of of basin at the pollution sources. if we are going to restore the

resilience of the gulf ecosystem, this is one of the things that we should be undertaking in this restoration effort, an epa has a leadership role in that regard. >> and to be clear, contrary to my initial assumption going into this dispersants issue, we believe that administrator jackson made it quite sound indefensible professional decision with respect to her permission to use dispersants in the way that she did. yes, ma'am. >> thank you. i am from bloomberg news. the reorganization that you recommend, how does it compare to what secretary salazar said? >> secretary salazar has made decisions that are correct and responsive to the kind of concerns that we have. he has now separated safety and

regulation and leasing and revenue generation, and the report to two different undersecretaries. we were sport -- we support that and respected. we think it is not enough. they still report to a single sect -- deputy secretary, who reports to the secretary. we're proposing there be a walled off enterprise that is headed by someone appointed for a term, someone who has industry knowledge or experience, engineering capability, and training, and cannot be removed or politically interfered with. we think for the long term that is the only way to ensure that revenues do not again become excessively influential in decisions relating to non- revenue items such as safety and environment. yes, ma'am.

>> i am with reuters. i was wondering that what all the additional regulations you're calling for, things of that nature, any concern about further delays in the gulf? there are already complies that there has not been in new deepwater drilling permit and drilling could be delayed until next year. is that something you took into consideration when you are planning your report? is that a concern now. >> sector. >> yes, we did take into account. as commissioner money teachers recommended, we recommended an increase in the amount of time that the department of interior should have to review public applications. but it was not an indefinite amount of time. it was from 30 days to 60 days. we are sensitive to the fact that there are costs, both

financial costs and time costs, involved in these decisions. but think of the enormous liability that the industry has just brought upon itself as a result of the failure to attend to the basic safety, and does deepwater horizon. we think that the long-term viability of the industry in the gulf and its economic successes in the gulf are very closely tied to a new standard of safety and environmental protection, which is what our report will establish a path toward achieving. >> we will take a couple of more. yes, sir. >> help you deal with the fact that they hire a regulator who

understands the industry, the compensation package paid by the federal government will never be on the level that the private industry can pay for and could presumably take a personal way? you had a revolving door among the regulators. >> we have to get the compensation of for those highly trained, especially informed technical people to operate within to capacityoemre. -- within the agency. whether we can get up to a level comparable of that industry remains to be seen. that is one thing that i think the regulator can be helped by having a safety institute with industry people who are evaluating, auditing, and inspecting and who do have comfortable compensation as a nuclear-powered industry, the people in the non-profit in to see that the industry has set up

are every bit the equivalent in terms of pay, also, on the people of the reactors that they are expecting. that can be done and it needs to be done and i think that combination together, an institute to supplement, reenforce regulators, it will give as much for protection. >> i think the united states is the exception to the role. the fact is that most of the countries where there is a substantial amount of oil and gas exploration to compensate -- do compensate their professional regulators to allow them not to be out man. interestingly in great britain, it has been said that if there is one issue that unites the industry, it is the desire to have strong, effective, professional regulation because the industry understands that its continued success,

particularly in the north sea, is a direct function of how well it performs, which in turn is affected by the quality of regulation. >> one final question. all right. >> forgive me if you cover this. one of the lessons learned from this experience in terms of allowing areas in which oil drilling should be expanded should be brought closer to florida shores? >> you are now asking me policy and a parochial question. i believe that one of the issues that this has raised is the issue of the future of energy policy in the united states. at the current level of proven reserves, and at our annual

consumption of petroleum, if america were to go to a drill, they become a drill philosophy, we would exhaust our reserves by approximately 2031. if we continue at the current levels of using 40% domestic and 52% imported, we will stretch that to the year 200068. -- 2068. i think those numbers indicate the imperative of having as part of the energy policy that we need to be holding back some areas that have potential for future generations, and the absolute imperative of moving aggressively toward producing america's almost insatiable appetite for petroleum, and appetite which today is

consuming 22% of all petroleum from the north sea, africa, australia, as well as the united states. we are using 22% of it. those numbers are not sustainable. i believe that our policy towards reaching out to areas that are not currently being exploited has to be within that context. >> an effective summary and conclusion their statement. thank you all very much. well done. >> the queue. -- thank you. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011]

>> and a few moments, new jersey gov. chris christie's state of the state address. then the state of the state address from indiana gov. mitch daniels. later we will we are the briefing on the final report of the commission looking into the gulf oil spill. on "washington journal," we will discuss the arizona shooting. mike pence of indiana talks about his party's priorities for the new congress. we will be joined by television and radio show hosts tavis

smiley. it is live at 7:00 a.m. eastern every day on c-span. >> middle and high school students, it is time the upload your video to the studentcam competition. get your 528 minute and video to c-span by january 20 for your chance to randy grand prize of $5,000. there's $50,000 in total prices. studentcam is open to students grades 6-12. for complete details, go online to studentcam.org. 's next, chris christie stated the state address. this is about 40 minutes.

>> i what ask you all to rise for a moment. we had an extraordinary tragedy does past few weeks of ask that you take a moment of silent prayer for the recovery of congresswoman giffords and the other victims, and also for the family and friends of those whose lives were lost, including a native of new jersey. let's take a moment of silent reflection and prayer for their recovery and help them through their grief.

thank you all very much. the 10th governor 1 dongle. madam speaker. mr. president. members of the legislature. and the citizens of the state of new jersey. it is my constitutional duty to report to you each year on the year that has passed and on the state of our state. today, it is my privilege to report to you that the state of our state is improving, getting better every day. [applause] why do i say that? state spending is down 9% in one

year. the budget has been balanced. state taxes are lower for the first time in a decade. the unemployment rate has begun to drop, and today is below, not above, the national average. companies are beginning to take a second look at new jersey. together we have begun to does something no one thought was possible. we are beginning -- we are turning our state around. [applause] without a doubt, there is much work still be dead. but we cannot turn back now. new jersey is coming back. one year ago the fiscal year 2010 budget was over $2 billion

in deficit with the year more than half gone and our options shrinking fast. the state was actually in danger of running out of cash, within weeks of not being able to meet payroll. we faced a deficit that was projected to be $11 billion, equal to 37% of the budget, the largest deficit in proportional terms in the country. property taxes had risen 70% in the last 10 years. independent analysts concluded we had the highest overall tax burden in america. unemployment was at 10%, the highest in interaction, -- the highest in a generation, in the region, and above the national average. wealth and jobs and people were leaving the state. the new jersey we love, the new jersey of our youth, but was in danger of slipping away. some were beginning to write off

new jersey. doubting we could change what the newspapers called our old, hide-bound ways. back then, the state's largest newspaper opined, taxes are too high as it is. another paper put it simply, new jersey must change course. the day of reckoning has arrived and arrived with a vengeance. we had a clear choice, to continue our reckless ways or change course and choose a new, difficult path, one that would require real political courage from all those who embraced the change. well, we did change course decisively. today, step by step, we are putting ourselves on a better, more sustainable path and pushing ahead on the road to growth. step one was to turn trenton upside down.

to reverse the pattern of increased spending and taxing, to upend the culture of burying problems instead of facing them. his seat, the right answer is to face big problems now -- you see, the right answer is to face big problems now or face bigger ones tomorrow. i believe in a culture of truth. it has not always been easy because some of those troops were not pleasant. but at the same time, everyone knew that the old direction was driving our state off a cliff into the abyss of no growth, high unemployment, and a fleeing population. but we did begin by turning the mindset of trenton around, and today with your help new jersey's comeback has begun. [applause]

the last year may have seemed like a long and winding road, but together we have actually changed direction quickly. but it what is happening just the last 12 months. within three weeks of taking office, we took immediate action to prevent of financial crisis and stabilize the state's finances. we balanced that fiscal year 2010 budget by holding back what spending could be stopped, and averted new jersey's cash crisis. we enacted the first deaths in reforming our system of pensions and benefits, saving state and local taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars. we enacted legislation to head off the looming crisis in our unemployment insurance system, preventing a tax increase of as much as $700 per employee for many employers. we made a down payment, with unanimous support in