the security environment continues to improve, but it will remain complex. the threats to instability will remain in 2012. groups like al qaeda will continue to target the government of iraq, iraqi security forces, and iraqi civilians to garner media attention and to demonstrate that the shia extremist groups like was will continue to target u.s. personnel, and in our absence, the iraqi government and its institutions. while the iraqi security forces have a good capability to confront sunni and shia it extremist groups and provide for security, they will have gaps in their capabilities in 2012. iraq will not be able to defend its air sovereignty for some time. they will also require continued development on capabilities such as logistics and sustainment and intelligence as well as more complex training.

the iraqi security forces will continue to develop the capabilities, which will require them to continue receiving modern equipment, conduct training on that equipment, and then conduct unit level training. u.s. forces and iraqi security forces have recently begun a collector training initiative, which requires entire battalions to go through an intensive training cycle. program provides the iraqi army with what is necessary for their units to operate and has been made possible by the much improved security environment. this training is a great step forward towards improving their proficiency, but they will still require much more comprehensive combined arms training and joint training in order to develop an exiled defense capability. with the time that we have remaining, u.s. forces in iraq will continue to advise, train, assist, and equip the iraqi security forces and to narrow

some of these capability gas. we will also work closely with the u.s. embassy as we transition from a predominantly military-led to a civilian-led effort in iraq. we are dedicated to partners with our embassy teammates in preparing for this important transition. the key to a successful transition is the need to fully resource the embassy to perform their tasks and responsibilities. we are developing the office of security cooperation, which will fall under the embassy, and the osc will provide oversight over all security cooperation in iraq, and it will assume responsibility for the near $13 billion worth of foreign military sales programs that we currently have with the iraqis. it will also coordinate international military education and training. this office will work hard and dedicated to closing the capability gaps within the iraqi security forces.

clearly, there is much work to do, but i am encouraged by the progress that iraq has made over the last few years, and i'm confident that iraq can achieve its full potential if it stays on the path is currently on. i would like to close my remarks by recognizing the great men and women that are serving in iraq and their families who are supporting them. while our soldiers, sailors, airmen, marines, coast guardsmen, and civilians are serving overseas, our families are serving here at home, and we would not be where we are today without the sacrifices of so many. and without the unwavering support from here at home. mr. chairman, members of the armed services committee, thank you once again for this opportunity to appear this morning, and i stand ready to answer any questions that you may have. >> thank you so much.

general. ambassador? >> thank you. let me join with general austin in thanking you for holding this hearing and inviting us to appear before you discuss the issues associated with the united states transition from a military-led to a civilian-led presence in iraq. we face a critical moment in iraq where we will either step up to the plate, finished the job, and build upon the sacrifices made, or we will risk core u.s. national security interests, the penny wise and pound foolish, and see the field to al qaeda and to other dangerous regional influences. we have thus a historic opportunity and a critical window to help iraq emerged as a strategic partner in the course for moderation in a troubled region. we cannot afford to let the gains we have sacrificed so much for slip away. the president has articulated our mission for our partnership with iraq. we seek an iraq that a sovereign, stable, and self-

reliant with a government that is just representative and accountable, that denies support and safe haven to terrorists is able to assume its rightful place in a community of nations and contributes to the peace and security of the region. the u.s. military have performed admirably, but they cannot stay forever. the department of state is ready to take the lead, but we need support and resources to finish the job. we need support to carry out key transitions. these include work throughout the country, especially in key areas. such as kirkuk and mosel. past experience has shown how small number of americans can have a great disproportionate impact in helping to defuse crises and propose long-term solutions. an absolute critical component to the country's long-term stability, as general austin

said, to provide security assistance to help the iraqis face the job against al qaeda and other terrorist groups and develop a core capability. to not finish the job now creates substantial risks of what some people call a charlie wilson's law moment. al qaeda is still capable of devastating attacks. furthermore, getting our -- gutting presence in iraq would provide iran increase stability to great anxieties in the region back could spiral out of control. iraqis have a big difference in this war. 4300 s, 3300 wounded. -- 4300 deaths. among our military forces. hundreds of embassy casualties as well. as the vice president's stated during his recent visit, it is vital that we leave behind an iraq that is worthy of the sacrifices so many have made. while all u.s. government work

in iraq is expensive due to the security situation, a robust civilian presence represents a significant reduction in expenditures. between 2010 and 2011, for example, the u.s. military withdrawal reduce the bill of taxpayers by about $15 billion, while the increase in state budget was just $2.5 billion. while the funding needs will naturally increase because of the military to civilian transition, the overall u.s. costs will continue to decrease dramatically. moreover, u.s. development assistance to iraq is not open- ended. iraq has vast untapped oil resources, but due to the devastated oil infrastructure, it will be a number of years before iraq will have meaningful new oil revenue for its own budget. getting the military to civilian transition in iraq also will demonstrate more generally that we can transition security successes in war zones into long-term stability including

for afghanistan. in closing, i would like to thank the department of defense, central command, and above all, general austin and his troops for the support they are giving us in this mission. i would like to express my admiration and humility in the face of the commitment we see on the part of our military and stuff. as they missed their lives for -- risked their lives for this, because they believe in, the iraq i just finished describing. i thank you again for the opportunity to appear before you today. >> posted a will be made part of -- they will be made part of the record. we welcome you very warmly. we repeat that welcome. we are delighted that you are with the committee. other new members of the

democratic side. we welcome your statement, ambassadors, to what the goals of the obama administration are in iraq, and i think maybe all of us or most of us surely share that goal. we talk about stability and security and self-reliance of an iraqi state and an iraqi government. that certainly has been the goal. one of the threats to the success to the achievement of that goal is the failure of the political leaders of iraq to reach conclusions and some critical issues. -- on some critical issues. this has always been a problem. we have always expressed the importance of the political leaders coming together. now, some of the current political issues that are

unresolved include the following -- an agreement to create a national council for higher policies with real executive power headed by former prime minister alawi. there's an agreement that the council decreed but no agreement yet as to what their powers are. i think i misspoke. there is an agreement that the council they created but no agreement on what the powers of that council will be. the positions and ministers of defense interior, and national security are still on the field. -- unfilled. there is no agreement yet on oil policies. the division of oil revenues. these are huge issues that remain unresolved and i believe threaten the goals and objectives that we have and, hopefully, the iraqis have for themselves. can you comment on this matter? is it important that the leaders ever racked get on with the decisions in those areas? ambassador.

>> thank you, mr. chairman -- >> we are going to have a seven- minute round, by the way. i normally announce how long the rounds are going to be. >> it is vitally important that they finish the job of forming the government. they have taken most of the steps necessary, but you have outlined several other remaining issues that we have been pressing them on, but more importantly, they have been pressing themselves on. we have seen some progress in the last several weeks on the national council, and the tip of we'll asides basically agreed to everything but the modality of how to select a doctor -- everyone agrees that he should be selected. we think this should be resolved in the next few days. i was in contact with the president of the kurdistan regional government this morning and the embassy with other people trying to take the temperature of other people of where we are on the steps. there are also some names floating for both of those mysteries that we mentioned.

again, we are encouraged by what we have heard over the past several days, but the proof is in the pudding, and we have to see if they will finish the job. it is very important that they finish the job and get on with the business of government. on the oil account, two positive developments, as with everything else in iraq, it moves forward in relatively small steps, senator, but it does move forward. the courage and other coalition parties agreed on a 19-point plan -- most of a 19-point plan that includes giving priority to our hydrocarbons law and revenue sharing law. this is vital. meanwhile, the central government and kurdistan regional government have agreed on an interim step of allowing up to 150,000 barrels of oil to flow out through the turkish pipeline. this is a very significant development and gives us hope that they will continue down that path, sir.

>> thank you. general austin, is the withdrawal of our forces by the end of this year, has agreed to o, by president bush and prime minister maliki, on track? >> thank you, senator. it is indeed on track. we recently completed our planning process that will govern the remainder of our activities from now until the end of december, and we have issued operations order 1101, which again describes the major activities that we will be conducting, focused on strengthening the iraqi security forces, repots during our -- reposturing our forces, and also transitioning

responsibilities to the embassy, the government of iraq, and central command. we continue to synchronize that plan, and we are also synchronizing the activities of the embassy, along with our activities as we go about executing the plan. >> thank you. is there any indication -- and i will ask this of both of you -- that iraq is going to request any elements of our military forces remain beyond december? >> we have received no such request. we are working with the iraqis, as the general said, on the security elements of our post- 2011 presence, which will include a large element for our security operations and the police training, which will be a major program. both of these are under the framework of the strategic framework agreement, which was the second agreement signed in 2008. does not have a deadline.

it calls for broad cooperation across the spectrum of bilateral relations, including specifically security, so we are working with iraqis now on exactly what the components of that would be. >> do you expect when you request -- any request be on -- beyond that from the iraqi government? >> i cannot say what will happen in the future. >> do you have any expectation that such a request will be forthcoming as of this time? >> as of this time, there is no specific request on the table, and they will want to see how they will -- how we will meet their training and equipping needs with the program that we set up. >> i echo the ambassador's comments. we have not received any requests, and again, i think he so i would not add anything to that. >> another threat to the stability and security and self-reliance of rack is iran -- but of ir -- of iraq is iran.

can you tell us whether iranian behavior in iraq represents a threat to your -- to the stability and successful transition to their own total sovereignty and what also is the susceptibility of the government to iranian influence and this -- their influence? >> we are concerned with iranian behavior in the region and in pursuit of nuclear weapons. >> in iraq? >> in iraq specifically, we first of all have to note that as a neighbor of iraq, as a country that has suffered devastating losses by iraq in 1980, iran obviously has legitimate interests, just like

turkey does and kuwait and saudi arabia do. there is significant trade. there is a tremendous amount of pilgrimage, and stuff. this begins with the support we have seen over the years. prime minister maliki took them on in 2008 in basra and then in sadr city and in baghdad. we are watching that closely. we are seeing continued signs that iran has not given up support for these groups, and this is very troubling to us. in terms of the government, in the iraqi government, like any government, they pay attention to its importance neighbors, but we are convinced that this is a government that is nationalist and fully aware of the threats to its sovereignty, and they will take the necessary steps to

protect it. >> they may be concerned about their neighbors, but specifically, is there a problem that iran creates for iraq with their current behavior? >> with iraq, the government has to face many things which you describe. >> is one of those iranian behavior? >> it is not on the shortlist at this time with the iraqi government, but we are well aware of the potential for trouble. >> is it on the long list? >> they are very much aware of that. >> it is great to have you here. senator mccain? >> i am concerned about this

complete withdrawal. general austin, i think we would agree that the situation in fallujah could even be compared to the battle of house-to-house, kind of a high-casualty, high- intensity conflicts, and when we fast forward to the battle of sadr city, which made use of technological capabilities that we have developed over the intervening time, in the absence of the united states, with the iraqis have the same kind of capability that was vital in winning the battle of sadr city? >> senator, certainly not. they would have to develop that type of capability over time. and the capability i think you are referring to is the capability to employ a acquired targets and in play -- employee

things that limit collateral damage. >> right? >> absolutely, senator. >> and without the u.s. presence there, it would take a long time before the iraqis would have the ability to replicate that. >> it will take some time for them to develop that. >> the iraqis are interested in having an air force for obvious reasons. are they going to be able to build an air force without the u.s. presence there? >> they have some options. >> they would have to get trainers from other nations? >> they would. >> which you agree, ambassador jeffrey, the priority is to prevent any change to the

security agreement -- would you agree? to assure that no u.s. troops will remain in iraq by january 1, 2012? >> senator, i cannot assess the full accuracy of their intentions. >> my question is would you agree that it is the highest priority of the iranian government? >> i would say it is the significant priority of the iranians do not have u.s. forces on its doorstep. >> how concerned are you, ambassador jeffrey, about the violence against u.s. civilian officials that might entail or occur after our withdrawal? >> senator, my highest priority as ambassador is the security and safety of my personnel. my people on a given week are the subject of sometimes one,

two, three attacks, between in direct fire and typically ied's -- indirect fire. so it is a very big concern of ours. nonetheless, it is a concern we have lived with since we have been there in 2003. >> i understand that one person is back again. is that correct? >> the latest i heard is that he is back in iran, sir, but it is very hard of us to keep track of his going back and forth. >> and his followers are a key element in the formation of the maliki government? >> his followers or his party played a role bank in the october period, when the maliki government was first forming -- played a rollback in the october period. -- played a role back in the

october period. their role, which is relatively minor in the government, reflects their voting power. >> but it also played a key role in the formation of the government. it was then to enable maliki to form the government. i am very concerned about soldersadr -- about sadr and telecine -- talibani and others. the government of iraq has already released a lot of individuals who have been detained by the u.s. military compound and we hear -- u.s. military, and we hear that he

has released more. do you have concern about that, general austin? >> i always have concern. >> it is happening? they are being released? >> there are a number of detainees that are routinely released because of lack of evidence or because they may have served their sentence. >> do you believe that some of them have been released because of the influence of sadr? >> i cannot confirm that. >> is it your opinion? >> without proof, i would be hesitant to provide an opinion on that. >> in some areas, like mosul and kirkuk, there is a considerable

u.s. peacekeeping presence. what is your concern as far as the removal of the presence, concerning igniting the two parties? >> our presence of their has provided a means to build confidence and to enable the arab and kurdish elements to work together there, and they have done, the troops have done, a magnificent job of working well together. the tensions, in some areas, tensions still remain, and i think that as we removed those combined security locations, i think that has to be carefully managed. at the end of the day, the issues that are present there though need to be resolved politically, and that may take some time. >> i hope, ambassador, you will make some representations to the

iraqi government concerning the situation at the camp, and i want to thank both of you for your service, and may i urge you to continue to make the case for continued united states assistance as the government goes to a very difficult and difficult transition. there are enormous pressures that are going to be probably increasing in the congress, and we are going to have to convince a lot of people on the importance of sustaining and assisting a free and independent iraq as it makes this transition. i thank you for your service to the country. thank you. mr. chairman. >> thank you, senator mccain. senator reed.

>> as senator levin indicated, we were there just a few days ago to firsthand witness the process, and the challenges, and i want to underscore something that senator mccain said, which is absolutely critical, which is the need for an increasingly civilian-led effort, as the mission migrates from the dod budget to the civilian side at the state department. as it looks more like something rather than supporting the troops in the field, something senator mccain pointed out, in this environment, it is very difficult to sustain, and i think he pointed out quite perceptively that if we do not, then we have invested a lot of blood and lives and material that could be frustrated, and that would be a tragedy.

as you pointed out, ambassador jeffrey, one of those charlie wilson moments, where, what were we thinking? again, i think that was a central point, and it was very was said by senator mccain, i want to emphasize. i think it is important to get some perspective. ambassador, you pointed out that over the course of our operations this year, for example, in afghanistan and iraq, is what, combined? any idea? >> on the civilian side, it is roughly $2 billion-plus. that includes both the assistance program, and we are beginning to get some of the monies for the police training program. it is complicated accounting. and then the budget ist $1.87

billion -- and then the budget is 1.8 7 billion. -- $1.87 billion. >> your numbers? there are billions we are committing annually. when the transition is completed, what is the number that you need, mr. ambassador? >> we have not quite finalized that for fy 12. what i can say is that the building blocks would be where we are now. we would like to take over the training and equipment program as a state department program. right now, that is $1.50 billion. it would be a significant percentage of the $1.50 billion.

the police training program is approximately $1 billion a year, and the operations in the field, taking over some of the security missions and the logistical missions, but particularly security missions of the military, doing perimeter security and movement security, on the order of $500 million or more per year, so if you add that up, it would be about twice what we are doing now. >> can you add it up? you are better at masset and i am. >> if i had to add it up, it would be about $5 billion, senator. >> down to $5 billion. >> there are some dod costs associated, senator. we do not quite know how much that would be, because they would be doing the security, and, obviously, some of the payments, but, really, we are looking at a 90% reduction. >> this is good news, but the reality is, unless we are

prepared to fund our efforts at the tune of $5 billion, $6 billion a year, then you are going to have a difficult time sustaining the progress that we have made. is that clear? >> i am not going to sustain the progress we have made, at least in supporting the iraqi government. >> what percentage of that is it of the state department's budget? >> it is between 5% and 7% of the state department's foreign assistance budget, the monies that we would have, roughly half a dollars billion for another, and then the police training. if he struck out salaries for our people, the basic operating budget, it is pretty big. it is almost as high as 30% in the statistics i have seen.

>> in some categories, 30% of the budget. this is a huge amount of money. >> taken together, this would probably be the single biggest in the state department. >> let me reiterate. i think we all understand that when programs migrate from the department of defense, keep the troops in the field, rightly so, foreign aid, that is a lot harder to sell, and we have got to make that. i think that is the message i heard on both sides. let me interject another issue, which is i saw a competition on the dod side between assets for iraqi assets for afghanistan. and at the same time, you are trying to do this in iraq, you are trying to do the same thing in afghanistan. pull the military forces out, stand up afghan forces, turn it

over to the civilians. so what is your view? this is going to be a competition not only for money but also money for the afghan effort. we have the same deliver their. -- dilemma there. >> there is one difference. in one year, i will be operating without the u.s. military, and our colleagues will not be operating without the u.s. military. >> when we were there, the department of defense had identified 1000 the tax -- 1000 things that had to be accommodated, and some of them have clear sort of dod fingerprints, korea travel routes, protecting persons, and others are tasks that are routes -- we'll travel

-- real travel routes. the kind of support you are getting in directly, the positive spillover benefits with the military presence, that number, $6 billion plus, that you suggested is probably an underestimate. mr. ambassador? >> as i said, we do not have specific figures at this time, but in the order of magnitude of double what we are doing now is what we will be looking for in fy '12. the support and activities that the military are doing, it is very hard to put a figure on to that and how much of that would translate to us because it is apples and oranges, and we have to pay the salaries, combat troop salaries, and the base,

and we get an extraordinary support, billions of dollars in support, from the military every year, everything from identification of incoming rockets to logistical support. there is no doubt about it. >> thank you. again, gentlemen, thank you for your service. >> thank you very much. >> personal security details, these are the people -- >> security contractors? is that what they are? the acronym? >> exactly. they could be military, or they could be contracted security. >> thank you. senator lindsey graham. >> i think senator reed brought up some good points. if you bring all of the troops home, we would all like that as soon as possible, you still have a country that is in the very

early stage of development in terms of democracy. when both of you agree with that? that iraq is an infant democracy, at best >> yes. >> i think they are a solid infant democracy. >> ok, the solid category. just like any other infant, you need to provide some assistance and nurturing, make sure they grow up strong and healthy, and that is the challenge forward, is that correct? taking them from this to a mature democracy? >> the iraqis appreciate our assistance. there is an issue of sovereignty here. >> no, i am not saying we would do it for them. i would say we would help them. >> yes, sir, it is in the strategic framework specifically. we support them in election monitoring and setting up elections and in many other ways. >> the general population, do they want us to continue to be

their partner in some fashion? >> the general population wants us to be their partner. >> the air force? >> they do, senator graham. >> we have the iraqi navy. they want us to help them in that regard? >> they do. >> so we are not staying in places where we are not wanted, is that a fair statement? wherever that is? >> that is a fair statement, senator, but most polls say that the iraqi population in general would like to see the military presence be withdrawn. >> i understand that. now, let's get back to what is penny wise and pound foolish from the iraqi and american point of view. to carry out your mission in 2012 without u.s. military security being provided, we are basically creating a small state department army. is that correct? >> i would have a problem with

two words, senator. "creating" and "army." i will explain. we have contractors and many security personnel. that would grow by an order of magnitude, significantly. we already have a large number of security personnel operating in iraq. >> enough to do the job? >> if we get the money to have additional security, it is enough. >> talking about that additional security, will it include -- will it include helicopters? >> it will, senator. it will include a large number of helicopters, senator. >> ok, will these helicopters be armed? >> they will not, senator. >> if something happens, do you have enough capacity to shoot

your way out of the, or are you going to have to rely on the iraq security, if you are in kirkuk or mosul and something happens? >> with the iraqi security support in the cities, we -- >> how dependent are you today on american military security? for your movement? >> essentially all movements outside of baghdad. by agreement between the embassy and centcom. this will change when they go. >> ok, so all movement in iraq, state department and other agency jobs require this in iraq to provide security, and next year, they are gone. who fills that vacuum? >> first of all --

>> let me ask this. would it be wise from an iraqi-u s point of view that that not be completely -- that we not create a complete vacuum? would it make sense? would it make sense financially, security wise? you will have a military footprint left behind if the iraqis request to continue to provide security for u.s. state department officials and others? >> we are always happy to have u.s. military security. >> thank you. >> from a professional military point of view, what lies ahead in iraq, do you believe it makes sense, given the security requirements that lie ahead for our state department officials and others to get out of iraq

that it would be wise to have an american military contingent in 2012 in iraq? >> senator, the iraqi security forces have the ability to control the internal security of the country. currently, as you know, they are leading the effort to do that now, and they do need continued work on logistics and intelligence capabilities. >> do you feel comfortable with the iraqi security forces as they exist, january 1, 2012, to protect the thousands of americans and other people in iraq tried to provide assistance to that country? can they do the job? are you comfortable with them being able to provide that security? >> i think that adequate security will be provided, provided the ambassador is adequately we sourced. >> is it your opinion we do not

need from a military point of view any troops in iraq in 2012? >> senator, what we are focused on now is abiding by the the agreement -- >> i know, but you are advising congress, and you are somebody that we respect. you have been on the ground a lot. please put on the table what you see is reasonably necessary or an insurance policy, for lack of a better word, or if you could construct the appropriate scenario, what would you have that scenario be regarding military involvement in iraq in 2012 and beyond? >> senator, i would prefer to avoid speculating on what we would be able to do and what we could provide, because i think that the iraqis would have to make a request, and as a matter of policy, our government would

have to -- >> my time is up. if there was a request from the iraqi government that "we would love to have some military assistance to train our air force, to help us develop a better security for your people and hours," if such a request is made, would you be favorably disposed to say yes? >> if it is the policy of the american government -- >> no, i am talking about you. would you recommend to us to say yes. >> sir, again, that is beyond my pay grade to make that recommendation. >> ok. >> thank you very much, senator graham. senator? >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. i want to welcome ambassador jeffrey and general austin to the hearing today. thank you for your testimonies

today and your continued efforts to assure that iraq becomes a stable, self-sufficient, and democratic nation, and i also would like to recognize the of standing men and women you both lead -- the outstanding men and women you lead in iraq, and we appreciate your sacrifice and hard work. ambassador jeffrey, in our transition, we are looking at many ways, and in particular, the provincial we construction teams have been in place -- reconstruction teams of been in place since 2005 throughout iraq and have worked building up provincial and local economies.

my question to you is can you discuss the current status of the reconstruction teams as they hand over their mission to our consulate offices? >> yes, sir. we have gone from a total including roughly 30 down about 16 right now. these are co-located, with an exception, with u.s. security. they are imbedded with u.s. military units. they are combined military- civilian teams, developmental assistance, rule of law, and the like. they have been extremely effective. and so forth. what we are going to do if we

get permission for the funding for those, in mosul, kirkuk, basra, and another location, in two cases, temporary for a number of years, embassy branch offices. this also requires the iraqis to approve the embassy branch offices. they have approved the two consulates. running out of the embassy. we will have five, and then we are looking at ways and various other areas, in other areas that are important, to leverage the presence of the police or others to develop, if you will, leak test -- lily pads, so we maintain some of the tremendous

contacts and some of the tremendous programs that we have had in places. >> thank you. we would like to continue the oversight there in october 2010. the state department had over 1000 employees, it 2007 hundred contractors in iraq. koran reports indicate that they planned to have -- 1000 employees, over 2000 contractors. -- our reports indicates that. embassador, avoiding problems that have surfaced on the blackwater security efforts. >> senator, we currently have

2700 security contractors. 5500, and then our police training program will require some security, as well, let's say the better part of 1000 more, and thenosci, working through dod, will also have security contractors, as well. we are very concerned, given the blackwater incident in downtown baghdad. the state department, under another person who is still on the job, did a report, outlining all of the problems that led to that tragic event, and we have taken various precautions and various modifications and reforms. the security companies have to be registered with two iraqi ministries. they are under iraqi law. we, in addition, have new as we call tcp's,

them, that require a full-time state department employees to ride in every convoy. we have cameras on the vehicles to record everything that goes on. we monitor where they are. we have done special training in was of an engagement and cultural -- training in rules of engagement and cultural issues. we have not had a serious incident since 2007. >> thank you. general austin, the u.s. government's presence will change, without question, significantly at the end of 2011, and we redeployed the remaining troops. what is the basis for a facilities -- for the

facilities? is any equipment or be handed over to the state department or brought back to the united states? >> thank you, senator. actually, we will do some of all of that. we will transfer and have transferred he committed to the state department to help in their future endeavors, and as they identify additional requirements, we will work with the leadership in dod to make sure we transition or transfer equipment as expeditiously as possible. we are also transitioning or transferring equipment to the iraqi security forces. as we draw down from a much larger footprint that we had that was over 100,000 to the footprint that we have today, we have 77 basis that we are

operating out of today, we transitions, by the way, in september from combat operations to another situation, somewhere around 92 basis, so as you can see, we continue to shrink our footprints somewhat, and in that process, we have continued to transfer equipment to both the iraqis and, again, identify the equipment that should be transferred to the embassy based upon their request, so it was somewhat all of that, senator. >> thank you very much. mr. chairman. >> thank you very much, senator akaka. senator? >> i realize that you are a military man and that you take orders and that you do not speak for yourself. you are under the command of the

president of the united states as our commander in chief. we appreciate that. and you are going to implement policies, but i assure you it is all right for you to come before congress and give opinions as to your best judgment, and i think that is what senator graham was unable to get from you from that line of questioning. the military troops are going to be gone after january 1, 2012. we are going to have a number of american personnel there who will still be in harm's way, so my question is, in your judgment, based upon your expertise, will our american personnel in iraq be as secure without u.s. troops as they would have been it troops remained present?

-- its troops remained present? >> thank you, senator -- if troops remained present. >> because i am hill ibm, i always believed it can be done better with the u.s. military -- because i am who i am. we are right now focused on achieving the objectives that have been laid out with the current security agreement that exists between our country in iraq, and that is where our focus is. >> i understand that there are other considerations, and part of that is what the people of iraq once, if the government wants it back that they have put in place. -- ones that that they have put in place -- wants that. on a scale of 1 to 10, if troops remain, what will be your

comfort level about your security without those troops there? >> senator, i would like to avoid trying to quantify any kind and is such a uzbek's without -- -- i would like to avoid tried to quantify any assessment such as that -- i would like to avoid trying to quantify. senator, i think that, again, because of new i am, i always believe that our military -- because of who i am, i always believe that our military adds to any situation, so i believe if ambassador jeffrey and his

team is equipped -- it can do better. we have a long history of doing these types of things. >> then, mr. ambassador, let me ask you about this. i want to make sure that we get your testimony complete. with regard to contract security personnel, your answer to senator akaka was one group, 2700 security personnel, another group of 5500, and then you mentioned others, but i did get -- did not get numbers there. >> thank you. i think this is important. we have operated with our own security, contract security, in iraq under extraordinarily

hazardous conditions. when i was there in 2004, 2005, it was total rock and roll. we were in basra, kirkuk, another area, operating on our own. we took casualties, but we did the mission. our security personnel do a very, very good job. they keep our people safe. baghdad is one of the areas where we have seen more tax than other areas. -- more attacks. we have to increase our security forces, both security for the perimeter and movement security. so, therefore, we are going from, as i said, the current level of security contractors and roughly 300 state department security personnel to some 5500

contractors, and augmenting somewhat the number of state department personnel who will be supplemented. in addition, the police training program will bring with it some additional security personnel. >> how many will that be? >> i would say the better part of 1000, senator, but i would have to get back to you. >> we have 5500 and then 1000, and then there is osci. >> the military support effort under the embassy that will be providing assistance, and these other cases. they will require security, as well, but i do not have a number on that. >> ok. you mentioned what the population of iraq want in regard to continued u.s. presence.

i know at a time, there was extensive public opinion polling going on of the iraqi people. mr. ambassador, is that still the case? >> there is a good number of different polls that come out all of the time, done by different international agencies, private companies. >> and are you privy to that information? >> we see a lot of it, that is right. >> the information you have, it is that a substantial majority of iraqi people that would like the united states to continue with a security presence there? absent the military? is that correct? >> they wanted overall relationship with the united -- i would not say a substantial majority, but it is much higher wanting a relationship with us than the% of the population that want to have an american force presence -- with us than

the percentage of the population that want to have an american force presence. >> ok, but with regard to the situation that we intend to have after january 1, is there majority support for that? >> i would have to check the polls, senator. it is a tricky question. it was a tricky question -- >> they get tricky even in the united states. >> yes, but they are tricky in the middle east, where i have spent much of my career. they were tricky in turkey, where, essentially, in all of these countries, there is a nervousness about countries having too much closeness with anyone, including iran, which does not fare well in any poll with iraq, or the sunni arab countries or turkey. they are nervous about relationships with any, because they have a long history of

being exploited, colonialization, and such as the case is in iraq, and the general population is to be wary, but nevertheless, taking that in mind, we would say that there is a general positive feeling on the part of the population towards relations with the united states in general, as the program will have after 2012. >> thank you, and thank you both for your service. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] [captioning performed by national captioning institute]

half.

>> okay -- here we go. good morning, everybody. thank you for coming. david asked me to do this in a slightly different order than is listed in the inside program. were going to do it on the front side of the program. so let's begin with bobby hamilton. >> mr. speaker, we have somewhat just go challenges here. look at the first one loaded and then we'll be ready to go. >> t ceasefire. very good. >> good morning. my presentation is focused on

doctoral degree attainment by four students that used u.s. universities in the same engineeringfield. this can be considered as a fm of highly skilled decoration for the purposes of educaon. the findings presented here are from a paper co-authored by myself and my two colleagues from george mason university, connie mcnealy and wayne perry. angst of the national scice foundation for their report. on a personal note, i first became intested in immigration and education in 1989. i just got out of the marine corps and i traveled to tokyo for your comments to the japanese that a local school. not too many westerners in the school, mostly korean and chinese students. and none of the students spoke english so we degree chance to communicate in only japanese. a tremendous experience, but the experience i also gained a great respect for those who leave their friends and families for many years to pursue education in a foreign country.

again, my talk focuses on science and engineering doctoral attainment at u.s. universities. the time period covered in this udys 1994 to 2005. doctoral attainment data was collected from foreign students representing 181 nations in the fight field -- the five fields of study or physical sciences sciences, life science is, engineering, not on accent computer science is in social and behavior sciences. during the 12 year period as the screenshows, the count was 96,466 foreign doctorates in science and engineering field. so it's a generally 100,000 students traina told their time. with their science and engineering doctorates of universities. let's talk about a conceptual framework for the top this

morning. this conceptual framework is offered to help better understand the phenomenon are foreign students traveled to the united states for their science and engineering doctoral degrees. first of all you can visualize the pipeline from each of the 480 when the first entry nations to universities, but also realize the same pipelines are similar pipelines from the 181 nations also extend to other nations with the degree granting university such as australia, canadian and european nations fear the pipelines to universities can be viewed as only one component of a global student migratory network. and further the student pipelines to the united states appear to be facing growing competition from other nations desiring the best and brightest . .

as home education, that is kindergarten through 12th grade in university education in terms of the domestic student education and screening pipeline at work prior to the studes to the united states. all said, the students who have obtained their science and engineering that is in the united states have traveled a tough road. first they have to pass the often challenging domestic education screening and selection process and then they had to compete with other foreign students to gain admittance to a u.s. university. now let's talk about the role of the u.s. universities. as for the u.s. universities, they have played a greater role beyond educating and training foreign science and education doctorates. the university should be viewed as a global recruitment and quality control mechanism that

screens and collects the best and brightest of the world's foreign students for admittance into doctoral programs. it should also be noted that the u.s. taxpayer has not paid for the foreign student kindergarten through 12 in undergraduate university education said that the home university -- and the home nations except the bill for this. so it seems like the united states has gotten a pretty good deal. that is foreign governments pay to educate their home nations students among the u.s. universities have the pick of many of the best of the greatest weather and science and engineering doctoral programs. alice talked a little bit about the role of the u.s. government. as forthe u.s. government, and heavily subsidizes doctoral education to include that for students. the rationale being that there are public benefits resulting from this type of education and research, development and innovation will suffer if students are not offered government and his to stain the

deck for a paper in a few. the u.s. government also issued student visas. it should be noted the student visa pipelined was disrupted due to the 9/11 2001 attacks, prompting the u.s. congress to take an interest in helping to establish a new student visa tracking system. further, foreign doctoral students also appear to benefit universities in a situation similar to on-the-job training, where the students are employed as relatively low-wage, highly skilled research and teaing assistants while they pursue their doctoral degrees. let me just get a drink of water. excuse me. okay.

as stated, foreign doctoral attainment at universities is a case of highly skilled migration. what seems to have generated policy interest has been a relatively large increase in the presence of foreign doctoral students on u.s. campuses in recentyears. for example is the chart shows, in 1980 there were less than 3000 science and engineering doctorates at american universities. the numbers 2842. as you see, this represented only 16% of the total, meaning that 84%, science and engineering doctorates attained a u.s. universities were obtained by u.s. sec, the numbers change from 1980, 1994, 2005, three reference points here. in 1994 the numbers increased almost 7000, which is 6950. by 2000 buy the numbers exceeded

11,000. and this number ncreased the stent representation to almost 40% of all doctors attained at american universities. as the next slide shows, it should be noted that there is variation between the five fields. for example, this is for 2005. as the chart shows, you see a great foreign domination of the engineering field for doctors. 61% of all thought traits in 2005 were by foreign students pay on the other end of the spectrum as you see why science 20% of life-sciences obtained by foreign students coming in at 72% if my math is correct, 72% of all doctors were retained by u.s. citizens. so you see the variation here. so my point is that we want to study the phenomenon, let's talk about a five different fields.

as a notice also social and behavioral science is, only 21% are obtained by foreign student. that means 49 were by u.s. citizens. now, the findings of the study are that four nations dominate in science and engineering doctoral attainment for 1994 to 2005. nations are china, india, south korea and taiwan. if you look at china and india, i think it's fairly apparent that these are large nations -- population countries. and the reason there are many in chinese science insuring doctors is there a large donation populations. what is ieresting is the outliers here are south korea and taiwan with relatively small populations, both of these nations and about 10,000 sence and engineering doctorates are during this time. so the question more than why is there so many chinese and

indians, i think the more interesting question is why there are so many taiwanese doctorates during this time. however, as the time. progressing from94 to 2005 coming soon to chinese numbers increased dramatically in indian and south korean numbers were fairly static and taiwanese and showed a lae decrease. this chart shows the change in chinese doctoral attainment for 1994 to 2005. you can see the screen, let me talk about this. in the ngineering field, in 1994, only 136 -- only 186 engineering doctorates are attained by chinese students peered by 2005, the number increased tenfold, more than tenfold to a little over 1500.

tremendous increase. as you see that the share of the chinese that trades among the foreign population also in creased sec and the ethical sciences 30%, life-sciences 32%, engineering and math and computer science 39%. you also notice the chinese representation in behavioral science is fairly small. i think the idea here is chinese students are less likely to become economists and social scientists are likely to become canada's, engineers and physicists. two minutes, very good. i think an interesting question. let's talk about engineering one more time. if you look at the 39% share in 2005 for chinese engineers for the 61% share for all foreign events, what it means in 2005,

one out of four doctorates at american universities were obtained by students. and for just a question for me as why are so many engineering.traits on the one hand being detained by students in so few are being attained in the life-sciences compared to american u.s. citizens? okay, in closing, the best and brightest of the science and engineering student from emerging market nations like china, india, russia and turkey will be an increasingly priced even resource to be recruited and competed over by developed nations with lowerbirth rates and creasing pools of talented young people. the united states should keep this in mind when formulating it migration policy. thank you. [applause] >> thank you very much, bob. that was fascinating.

when the hold ahold q&a until the end i believe. so patrick, i believe you are next. >> thank you. >> what i would like to do is talk briefly in a non-technical manner about two research papers i've been working on. the first one is about the students at the university and then everything about the project. the first speaker in keeping motivation for the paper i'm going to present, let me show you more numbers in the same line. so if you look at the population of students who finish degrees in the united states then you look at where the two got the

degree, there's a surprise that more students had come from the same university in china. so, maybe it's because it is quite surprising that you take someone who finishes a decree fromhe u.s. university is more likely to have done the degree at the university for the institution. so, the fire slightly deceiving because there are many good u.s. universities and not many good chinese universities. the figures i represented earlier were about 15%. overwhelmingly, we see a sizable

fraction of the science and engineering workforce in china. about 9% were born in china as of the 2000 census. if you take them altogether, about 47%. so is the leader of the contributions to u.s. science, one of these papers was on joe soprano. and i can get into a discussion about exactly the contribution of these papers. what i more interesting as all these papers came to e same conclusion, which is that migrants make the populations and contributions intend to be more productive on average been looking at science and engineers.

so in my own wok, we have something quite similar, but a bit more specific about the students. we're asking if the chinese students during this compared to the students. so we have agreed that i'm not going to give and not. we have about 16,000 students graduating from universe these in 2008. about 16% of which are chinese. and for a couple reasons we also could have a national science fellowship program. so it's a very prestigious award for u.s. residents whois to pursue the training in u.s. universities. so, these are the results i apologize for the technical table which is coming from the

paper is held. so we are looking at what compares among three groups o students. and in that table they can mostly be interpreted with differences. so the chinese students are about 25% to 40% low productivity of students. what we do in current one is put all the students together and then to compare students one and the same programs. and in the same advice he appeared as result. if 20% to 25% more papers and that is why we have the numbers and fellows.

and you can see the difference between the chinese students and other students are same order of magnitude. so many students do almost as ll as the fellows. at least we extend the same programs, so we're working with the same advisors. the interesting part is why is that the chinese students do well and so stories are following. they have announced a man for education, but to another sound, demand by chinese universities have present. so there are demands for quality education and student identified however, u.s. admission like formulas to the chinese system is going to be more difficult for chinese students to get on

the program then it is for american students. the first evidence is the case. but the other part of the stories if you're in china nd you want to get your degree in the u.s., you need to have an undergrad degree for one of the most prestigious schools to get into the program. ..

the other thing the profess is only as good as the student because the student learning the experiment and so the access to high-quality talented students enables universities to produce more of science. a number of limitations is we don't know what happens after the deal so we don't know if -- we know what the chinese students say in the u.s. but we don't know whether conformed their students so we know the differences continue over if the engineers and it could be the chinese students may lack some

of the skills which may be important. 1. i need to emphasize it doesn't follow from the fact whether the chinese students have a strong publication but the difference if it is good for the student is good for america. there's a couple arguments and the one is that chinese immigrants may reduce incentives for americans to engage for instance by reducing the wages. and just who this point besides the policy that could be used to address the concern and in particular the number amount of the nsf could be increased to make the carriers more attractive for talented americans during this

immigration policy and since i have three more minutes, let me talk about my paper on immigration today speaking we don't know much about mobility choices in the u.s.. we can not to a certain etent surveys but we don't know what happens to them, [inaudible] so chemistry, a chemical engineering departments and volume of the serving there is 17 years and the underlining population with some caveat. so i am following the careers

move. it is quite striking when the sense that only about 9% to some country, so about 91%. 90% stake in the u.s.. there is no return to china and india contrary to wh you may begin newspapers. it seems like those who return to this selection of professors who are in good schools are likely to return to their own country. despite some recent concerns the united states remains a very attractive place to do science.

[applause] >> good morning. i would like to thank david for inviting me and brookings for hosting this sesson today and you for having an interesting topic. but like to do today is present some ways of thinking about immigration, skilled immigration and policy responses. it seems a lot of our thinking certainly about skilled immigration as well as between to characterize it these kind o polar opposites. we need more that generate unusual productivity and jobs. or we need fewer because they

compete and they reduce oortunities for domestic students. i think by the end of this you will see i come out with a third way f. thinking about things. and i want to kind of build a little bit on what you have been hearing here as well. immigration policy crudely speaking has two important things it accomplishes. one is to set the numbers we emit and the offer is to control the quality. e we getting the best and the brightest? the numbers thing is fairly easy to understand, the pressures that set th demand formore or preferably designer for lower supply. but the other thing that is happening is globalization, and globalization and really skyrocketing education rates in many countries is changing the nature of both the student marketplace can't he possibilities we have for admitting the best and brightest and want to discuss that.

selectivity earlier is kind of a social science concept many of you are familiar with. it's how you actually get the best and brightest. the forces create the demand for the best and brightest migrants to come to the united states. i've got 12 minutes, going to skip some of this. i've got too many overheads. i would welcome you to listen to what i'm saying and skip them a little bit. but i want to do is set up in this slide when i'm going to be discussing briefly which is do we have evidence of past shortages in science and engineerg, what evidence we have in the medic restriction when we look at the labor market outcomes and what will the future bring? do we admit to few? if you look at this slide some of you have seen this. the reason you see the bulk of a lot of phd students from abroad in the u.s. population at

youngerges is because we admitted a lot of skilled migrants in various kinds of fields as well during the latter 1990's and that was set in place by the 1990 act and say that.com boom which changed the nature of demand and supply both he policy of the labour market level. so in fact you look at this and argbly we admit a lot of doctoral students but even masters students it shows up in the data. there are the foreign students. now, what you see there is a big dip in 2001 but you also see a big dip after 1981. what's going on in the ecomy in fact a global economy affects student supply and flows into the united states and arguably the 9/11 affect was pretty minimal and i have data to suggest that that was the case. the numbers have again started to respond to the global

economy. as the inflow of students in china and india is down 20%. i assume indy 500 is dwn 20% similar to what it was after 9/11. it's the economy. what's unique about what's going on right now is there's been a 40% increase in chinese students the last couple years so chinese students are coming to the united states in recrd numbers and there is such a large group they are offsetting which would otherwise be a decline in student enrollment in the united states. but think about this in terms of globalizion and like market share. we know that the u.s. market share of international students tart bum 25 to 20% over the last decade. people say that's terrible. yet at the same time the number of students in the united states increased by about 20%. the six nominal rate of increase. if jazz is the case we are seeing the nonlinear growth of students in a source countries, for us to read game effort of e international student

marketplace like we did 15 years ago we would be upwards in the u.s. institutions. can we absorb that have any stance, how would it change the nature of the education? and for what does it mean to have shortages? if you looked on the box here and you can't read all this stuff in any great detail wage changes lag by the professions. the person who looks at this says it is difficult to derstand why an industry with a high level of demand has few gains. and i play another game. i took a projection. this is a few-years-old. this is the total number of computer scientists and engineers have 2017. i then looked up at rates of

emloyment and extrapolate the mountain to the future and the residual then is what is with foreign-born students and the skill of migrants and the increase from 18 to play for% of their share of t particular occupational sector. here's the two things i want you to keep in mind. one is that is an increasing share buy lmost one-third in terms of foreign-rn in these occupations. and here is the other thing that is interesting. at the current level of immigration the numbers we had met annually we will hit that coing enough for unskilled workers to meet that sizable gain in foreign share of the labor markets. now let's talk about the globalization and selectivity a little bit. i want to talk about a couple of different examples so w, for

the oracle are moving from quality. the noble laureate for the cream of the crop they are also a small number so when people see this the business the example and think it's a small number. i agree with their systematic of the phenomena that i'm talking about when you have big barriers to migration say the chinese example, you create an environment you are highly selective of those who can move and bear the cost and have the special qualities that make the move across the international boundaries payoff. so we know for example that the immigrant share of the nobel prize winners has actually declined. that's the globalization. globalization shrinks markets, lower the cost of mobility and therefore is less selective. you can certainly see it here but another remarkable way, too.

that is the immigrant share of ph.d. labor markets has actually increased while at the same time to share of the nobel prize winners has decreased a bit so there's a decreasing selectivity in the two ways you can see. are there other ways in which you can see this? well, this is an ugly graph i realize. it was better when i did it last night. what we have got here is three different fields. the point is this is the ratio of educated and this is what the data permits me to become educated life and physical scientists about 35% more likely to have a college education than natives. that is out here back in 1950. but the ratio of education advantage has been going down. same thing with engineering. and then life science quite

different and that's fascinating. but remember, excuse me, information technology. remember information technology is a bit odd because a little under 10% of the i.t. workers don't even have a degree among of the domestic labor force so it doesn't need to be more educated in that context. earnings ratio have gone down. again except for i.t. which is strange. basically over time with this is is what we call social sciences the seletivity. it shrinks the labor markets, decreases the selected the of migrants and you see it in terms of the religious education to the labour force and in terms of the relative earnings. you are going to hear from life think dr. hunt and others and you heard there is a lot of good evidence that both workers and

students are productive. or they uniquely productive as the question. one thing you also hear about and we may hear it from david is the rate of start-ups. depending on the data you get, you get somewhat difference stories about the relative productivity of immigrants. but what i want to look at very quickly is this idea of corporate leadership using just simple data. what we can see is that if a national level of the united states, about 12% of the workers in the information communication technology industries are self-employed and a large share, a fairly remarkable share of ceo business owners and silicon valley which you probably can't see too well on less you look at what is said here quite a bit remarkable in silicon valley in

terms of basically directorship of corporations, yet fair share of the labor force is higher. so we're in my going -- where am i going? i want to return to the quality, numbers you can sit in different ways, quality is also set by the marketplace but it's also uniquely set by policy and there's three different philosophies i think generally. one in 3i opened in the presentation with. you can set large numbers in the market will sell for delete. meek policy process in less. not simply to facilitate the migration but to make it painless. talk to anybody yet it is this a chore department, hiring people is notpainless. it's not clear that at a meeting migrants' need to be less painless, less painful than just

doing good hiring. the 2006 bill that i mentioned, at 261 he lived in what have increased the scope migration over fivefold with escalators for h-1b, but it would have set the system pretty much the same. the numbers increased in that way i would argue would have an adverse affect on the selection. on the bottom end, there's an argument we have an oversupply of highly skilled workers. the third way which is number two is what i suggest people also consider which is balancing numbers. thank you. [applause] >> thank you. fally we have gerald. >> thank you, mitch. but i would like to do is focus on the policy aspect of immigration specifically as it

relates to how your education building on the interesting papers and analysis that has been presented here. i want to start with some brief rerks on my immigration took -- book. what i do is our duty to migration reform in order to boost long-term economic development and productivity beebee i also put a picture of albert einstein on the coverof the book just to remind all of us about the many contributions immigrant have made to american life over the years. we all know that it was surrounded by hamdi and indian, google was co-founded by a russian iigrant, dahuk was established by someone born in taiwan, and ebay started by someone in france. but with the american economy look like today if intel was a hungarian company, google was based in russia, ahoo! was a taiwanese company and ebay were french? inr do these are not isolated

stories. studies found many silicon valley companies have a foreign-born founder or cofounder. immigrants have made a vital contributions to our economy, just this morning we have heard very interesting examples of the rule of international students in terms of productivity. we've seen in the paper just the rising number of foreign students over the last 20 years. patrick documented the higher productivity. ndsay had some very interesting nuances to the story in terms of workers shortages broken down by steel and we see some of the interesting contrasts and between the i.t. field versus the other areas and then leader on the second panel you will hear more from david about the role of immigrants and students in establishing start-ups. so i think it in a lot of respects there is evidenceabout the contributions that immigrants make,et when you

look at our politics, our politicians are aralyzed by this subject. and it's kind of ironic that it's been difficult for the political leaders to address immigration even though virtually every but he dislikes some aspect of the status quo. and i think the problem with the immigration area is people perceive the cost as being high while the benefits are low. in that situation no big surprise, the policy area becomes radioactive for politicians, it becomes hard to resolve. there's a lot of emotion, there are many false information surrounding the discussion. so one of the reasons why we wanted to put on this forum today is to object some facts into a very emotional and polarizing topic and it's not like everybody is in agreement on what the facts are, would i think it is both interesting and important that there be some factual basis to these

discussions so we are not just making decisions based on opinions, ideology or false beliefs. in my book by make a number of policy recommendations about various aspects, but i want to focus specifically on the international student aspect cause that is what this panel was really focusing on a sound is a very interesting in roberts paper that he's found that 38% of doctoral students today are coming from abroad. yet very few of these people actually have an opportunity to stay here. one of the suggestions i make in my book and others have made te same suggestion, for example mile to the coming year michael bloomberg has talked with this as well as automatic green card for for individual american science and technology ph.d. programs. and we are not talking about a large number because if you look at roberts peter, it's not a

huge number that is required. but in terms of the quality, the possibilities for innovation, and the opportunities for the entrepreneurship of i would argue that the economic and it fits or huge. certainly when you look to the information technology field, the dot com or foreign students who came to enter ph.d. programs, there certainly are a number of examples where these individuals have made a dramatic improvement. now we could trust the market and there certainly are some policy mechanisms that are in place to match up the supply and demand in terms of the need we have for science, technology and engineering and math students. but we need to keep in mindthat the job opportunies are starting to change. you know, it used to be that we just needed math studentwere

hired education to jane teacher mathematicians and so on of it in recent years, we have seen the world of finance start to high year mathematicians. they are starting to take some of the people that used to go into high gear education and become college professors, the hedge fund companies, private equity firms, the risk assessment and officials are now starting to train some of these individuals. so i would be very interested in seeing lindsay's paper projecting to the future tht when you start to see greater demand across a variety of different areas, not just traditionally science and technology for people with ph.d. s in this area. it's a mismatch when to become larger. is it actually going to become a nation crisis? so for that reason i feel we need to become more productive as a nation. we do need to think about some of the policy actions designed

to fulfil fields where there are likely to be shortages and if you take the results of david's paper seriously if we did with the entrepreneur aspects and the startup aspects these are the people who are going to innovate, create jobs, build businesses, ey are going to be major parts of the u.s. economy so much as think we need to get more strategic in thinking about the need for high skilled workers and the role of international students in that area. thank you. >> okay. thank you all. have i forgotten anybody? i don't think so. well, we've cut to or time and admirably. in fact we are ahead of time so lots of opportunity for q&a. i would like to start if i might use the moderator's prerogative.

of course we've been hearing about the immigrants and the contribution they make. but we also regularly here anguished reports about the state or state of the stem education in the united states. actually eve country seems to moan about that. and the implicit in education there is not always being discussed is just the assumption that we need more people in these fields. and yet, lindsey, you were talking about maybe there is a supply problem. do we seemto have enough? we seem to have foreign students clamoring to come in. so how do you -- this is a big question, but how do you bellman's the immigration issue policy debate with calls fo improving our domestic supply of

scientists and engineers? am i on? bogerd. thank you. this isn't an easy not to crack. on the domestic side of the work i've done with my colleague at rutgers certainly suggests some of the simplistic ways in which we think that there's a lack of supply in the pipeline don't measure up. about one-third of incoming freshmen of the last decades said by one to study in stem fields so there's no drop in interest in terms of those who are capable. high scores are naturally not. if you look at international tests we don't do that well but then remembered as five, six, 7 million stem workers out of a labour force over 150 million. how many high skilled people, how many top percentage of the s.a.t. scores you need to supply the labor market?

now darryl brings an interesting initializing and at its extreme it gets into an issue of science citizenry and this is an old thing that's been around a century or more, the idea that to be an adequate member of the modern society you better understand science. at the extreme it's hard to know how to deal with that. i fink it's true but how much science to you need to know. if you look at fincial industry, a large share of the workers in the stem occupations, but a small sector role switch ascent psychiatric yep. another way to look at it there may be 15 million people in the united states would extend education and maybe one-third of that in jobs so clearly some of them are working out side of stem and that is a good thing but how many more do you need? and that is a hard nut to crack. did i answer?

>> just one comment. i believe that saltzman also points out when compared to foreign students coming to rest citizens tend to leave the pipeline earlier, and the sense is that talented americans don't stick around to get their doctoral degree. the greater tendency to enter the workforce, so at a certain point when you compare the of foreign students with a u.s. citizen students you have two different populations and i don't want to misquote or misrepresent views but he seems to suggest the best and the brightest tend to leave the pipeline earlier where has the most talented of the students tend to stick around and get your doctor if. >> that's not right? >> okay, please, correct me. >> we just worked with about several longitudinal data set and looked at progression from

the pipeline from high school to college into the labour market from the 70's to the 1990's and the early part of the last decade. what we found is that the change or the rate of attrition in the pipeline college, master's, ph.d., labor market, three years of conflict, six years out the transition hadn't changed much over all except for interestingly, and we didn't break it up, in the 1990's there seems to be a dip in retention and stem high year degree among the top quintile performers and that is an odd outcome and we don't know what's going on something did happen in the 1990's in the top performers. >> i beieve there are microphones coming around. i believe you are first and then the gentleman back there.

>> thank you. i'm a congressional correspondent for the hispanic out of higher education and read a lot about immigration and i've written a book on immigration and the american dream. being a journalist to have questions for each of you, so please, bear with me. patrick, i wonder if you've studied about the clustering in the various universities in certain geographic areas lackluster in one university say a scholar from that university. i wanted to ask you more about that with the wages tending to produce as the foreign student population and i haven't heard that 90% before. i usually say 70%. so that's really huge.

and i wante to ask you about the numbers. you said there's a few, but as you were saying, something like the actually hit the peak 600,000, over that peaked couple of years ago and not as close to 700,000. the majority of the students on a foreign student visas on the 700,000 the majority are graduate students, the majority of those are in stem. as we are talking to hundred 50,000 people, and if they e ven automatic green cards, i would think that is a sycophant number. xu could you talk about the number and then -- yeah, they are not all noble laureate, so we are talking quality of 250,000 plus and it's retroactive we are talking maybe a million people. and i would also like in the politics of course the whole of

their politics recovery is on the low-skilled workers and i think that you and i were talking at one point that this is a zero sum game if we are electing green hards comint the foreign students that it may be at the expense of family visas and i find there's a lot in the hispanic process particularly who are against that. >> patrick? skilling we definitely have the clustering of the chinese students and so then universities if we get in why you 50% [inaudible] if you look at the labs, headed by the chinese professor of

about 14% chinese students, much higher. an ntriguing fact [inaudible] doing very well where you have one professor saying [inaudible] >> again stem the immigrants were better educated so the nominal earnings tend to be higher. the point i was trying to make is if you use wages has another way of looking at some activity, but burns premium over the last half centu kind of thing and there's different ways you might want to think about that was a new set of slides i produced. i like to do something new in my presentations. i was also doing simple regressions on the wage

differentials and it turns out that of course the immigrants don't have the differential earnings the stem fields. jennifer is not here. that has a heavy caveat by again classified missions to the policy is a screening mechanism and it's a big difference in the outcomes so policy matters. >> peggy had interestin questions in terms of the numbers and we gave everybody in of american green card and i guess i would argue that the number of foreign students here today your taking of the undergraduates, taking out a graduate students in the bonn stem fields and taking out the people who drop out along the way and they do start to drop

the the question is let's say the number is still a big number we don't have the best device for picking is going to end up starting google or equivalent type, the probability of being able to find those people and keep them here. sthe spirit of the proposal is designed to expand beyond what we have today because today we read the opposite of the spectrum where they are so few or to veto forced to have an opportunity to stay here until they have found a jo and are able to qualify for the visa through theirmployer. then on the zeros some between the high school workers it becomes easier to sum game only if we sick with the current number either permanent or temporary visa that we provide.

in that situation then there is tension atthe high skill and the low-skilled area but if we ever reach the point where we increase those numbers it becomes much less of a zer sum game. >> i want to throw some of these policies of there because they are tricky. there is a select, you give a green card to four and a graduate degree and they can stay in the united states. i had the following issue with that. if you look at the australian experien the where they gave the lan to the graduates it included a decade of problems because it created the wrong incentives structure. what happened is i hope this doesn't surprise you, the students came to australia to get landed. so the incentive structure you build is important in greater numbers will not necessarily yield you greater results. you have today designed the

instructor right. it is a right way to go in terms of setting the incentive structure for the research and study which is what we want our students to be. >> [inaudible] the microphone is coming. please, one question per person. and with a think tank called immigration studies down the road from us. my question to this all male panel is why hasn't anybody mentioned the tension between essentially male overseas phd students and residents of this country who are female? i also would note in passing and i think this is correct in the area where the percentage of the

foreign-born ph.d. is the smallest which is the life science is also the area there are mor women presented the and the other four fields. thank you. >> thank you for answering that question. >> george mason and i are beginning a study on the gender issue and i think it is fascinating. what we would like to do is take a look at the demographics as a presentation i gave break it down by gender to see if there is an association to the nation's tend to have larger or smaller representations' in the male or female populations. but the question that i asked is there a large untapped population of talented women out there that are not being recruited to u.s. universities.

so give about a year and i will get that. >> okay. there and then we will start in the backed. >> i want to ask a little bit about your data about the entrepreneurship. you gave it samples of intel and google. there's two types of immigrants involved in that. one that comes here to stay and one that came for political reasons either with a visa not massaleit study but for the political asylum and both those examples intel and google are the latter -. >> response?

>> [inaudible] >> would anybody like to comment on that? >> in that case, back there. yes. >> my nme is jenner miller, a candidate at chapel hill and this question is for david hart. to mentioned the counterfactual at this intel were hungarian company and google were a russian company, but do we know that that is the alternative outcome or perhaps the entrepreneurial stories do to some of our other institutions around the entrepreneurship in the u.s. and let that counterfactual be that we would have waited a few more years

before the companies were founded and then the u.s. companies by the next person who grasped a similar idea. >> good question. counterfactual hard to test by definition but it is apparent in the united states is growing competition for entrepreneurship especially in the i.t. area. the president of rusia talked a lot about trying to create a russian silicon valley so they are very much devoted to training their students and keeping them in russia and building the company's. we se the same phenomena and a number of tikrit asian companies -- countries, so i guess the world i would have is when you look to the future with so many other countries seen the power of information technology as well as life sciences, the link between those areas and economic prosperity and job creation, they are now basically trying to

keep the students home so they can get the benefit of the contribution. that would be the thing i would worry about as we move to the future. >> yes, in the same row. >> hello. my name is lawrence. i'm working on my master's at the same and i am also in the immigration paralegal so it is a great intersection of the two interests. i'm rious as to think particularly for the indian and chinese nationals if there is any evidence because of the visa regression in the category to stay i the pipeline and to be extra productive with their scholarly work to be in that eda one category.

is the nicotine to our right -- i think you are right but it is to distinguish between the fact that the tide of students who come to the united states are different from some other. >> i would only add that it is typicly scientists so i'm not sure that it applies tohe student model. estimate to have a question regarding a very small snippet from the presentation where you talked about data that indicated a high your pesence of immigrants become interested in science and engineering possibly the there were fewer americans

actually jus interested in pursuing it to that level, so foranybody that wants to answer this, wat is the best incentive people seem to respond t? is the wonder of science and that when people come together ph.d. and stick around, is it for cash because someone actually said the decrease in wages could be the reasons your interest and finance is draining the mathematicians, so what do we need to instill to actually get people here to get interested in science and to pursue a because it's important. thanks. >> if you look at surveys they will tell you the reason they come to study in the united states is the quality of the institutions and also science. if you, like a good social economist, kind of look at the data, what we find is economic incentives really matter to the flow across the countries. there is a fascinating piece that looked at the availability of the slots and its impact on

the performance among foreign students and it has a positive impact. the story is that there is a labor market motive as well. creating the right incentive structure is difficult to do. one of the things clear is you can't simply janeth the supply side. to have to have the demand side. to stimulate the demand side don't get wage growth and if you don't get the wage growth you don't attract the domestic bor force and probably in the long run you don't have an impact on the call dever. tecum -- quality either. >> [inaudible] i have a question about [inaudible] how many people are getting a ph.d. and going back to their country. could you say that is related to

reasons like [inaudible] a system where they can study in the streets with their family. how much impact would that have to the american economy? >> that's a very important question. if we said to the automatic green cards for ph.d. graduates and science and technology field how many would actually want to take advantage of that as opposed to going home? i'm thinking in the past more would avail themselves of the opportunity to stay here because of the opportunities but i think moving forward this is where the united states is facing more competition the those home countries are making a major effort to bring the students back into the economic opportunities that are going to be available tothe students especially those coming from the asian countries is quick to be a huge. we have seen the estimates that by 2015 china is going to have

the larger economy than the united states. so i feel when that individual student is making a decision do they stay in the united states or do they go home? there are a lot of factors that go into it in terms of family asons, the situation in the home country as well as the perception of the economic opportunity. >> i have a question about demand and supply and how to measure these things. we are talking about high skilled workers overall. how do we understand the demand for workers? how do we measure it, and what do we know about international, the international selection of workers into the stream? it is a question about our economy. we are going through the

restructuring right now. what do we know from the past, how we understand the demand at thisoint? >> [inaudible] >> well we don't. [laughter] but we do look at certain indicators, levels of unemployment tend to be lw we look at the wage change which has been low and the demand for lawyers can increase wages city, 40% over a long period of time. why i't changing at all? why do they tend to lag other professions? do we need that many lawyers? i need lawyers, don't get me wrong but what is the relative demand? we don't know. but we do know one thing very quickly and that is that supply will respond to the wages and so if basically if employers put their money where their mouth is

they will stimulate the supply. so in a simple way that is one way to look at it. the complex answer is we are looking at the wires commissions to do this stuff and the u.k. is an interesting example. really using multipleays to try to determine the demand, and the standard critique i get to my presentation, how about petroleum engineering? it is a booming field. yes it is. so it doesn't match up with when talking about in engineering generally. as ao get to that level of detail which is wiin four years care about, the economy cares about, but darryl cares about wh he's talking about certain mathematical occupations. it takes a finely disciplined kind of approach. my approach is probably not to try to over fine-tune things which set the appropriate incentive structures and let the market worked out.

senate hello [inaudible] starting a project on the eshoo minn migration. my question is for everybody on the panel, and what aspect of the topic we are talking about today do you think would be the most useful for the u.s. public to discuss? thank you. [laughter] >> that's a very good question obviously since we are having trouble answering it. i would answer by saying the problem i hve with public discussions in cut immigration area in general is just how emotionally this and not linked to facts. i often like to contrast our

diussions about iigration with our discussions about social security. social security is seen as a review active issue described as a third real. politicians can't address it but the diffence in the security area is their tends to be in agreement on the basic facts and people argue like cats and dogs over the interpretation, with the policy ramifications are, how we should address things and so on. the problem in the immigration area isn't not only are we getting over things, we are arguing over the basic facts, so what we try to do this morning is just try and provide some empirical evidence to address these things so what i think the public needs to understand is what the facts are of the situation and it's not like there is always going to be a complete consensus but that is what distinguishes the immigration area from other areas and the reason why it has been so difficult for our country to address.

estimate for the general public i think it is useful to say that thers a lot of talented people in the world. if they have used for those folks then what's the problem? if you see the migratory movement student is a doctoral degree is t united states or china or india and the of context in china and india and some of the research shows the contacts both in he u.s. and china were u.s. and taiwan it is a win-win situation. for example the company might be started by a doctorate of silicon valley. john azar created in the san francco bay area and maybe i taiwan and maybe there is an

offshore somewhere else in mexico, whaever. this isn't a zero sum game, this is a potential for the wind when. people are able to go where there are jobs there are good things that happen and the challenge for the researchers to quantify that and make the case that this is more. the challenge now is to get evidence to show how this makes lives better for other nations in. >> it's not normal for somebody in education. >> consider this. the gnf did an international survey and asked people in the united states what portion of

the united states population is foreign-born. they said about one third. that is double the actual percentage and the set what proportion of foreign-born are undocumented in the legal residence and they said about half. kuwait at the national press club to make an interesting point they may not be knowledgeable but maybe they are why is. about one-third of the population is foreign-born and their children so what do they mean by immigrant? and those that have survived in the last decade are authorized and unauthorized migrants succeeded the migration for a good part of the last decade. so how much more do we need to educate in what way? i think from my presentation what i would like the public to understand is there is a trade-off between the numbers

and quality and sitting incentive structures is a very difficult thing. possibly and there may be a few that disagree with me. we still have more as a model like canada and austria when you have responsive. the control of these things with oversight sciu get the instructive correct. >> would any other panelists like how this should sit together and there's an optimal mix of the two.

>> [inaudible] >> we need a lot of creative thinking. there's a visa which would do away wit the system and one gets visa a lot of smarts to that. the h-1b number exceeds. even if the country capps you're not going to get around that. the numbers don't wash. it needs to be smaller and'd say more temporary. it makes it a true temporary and if you did that, expand the hb we would be in a much better situation.

>> the panel seems to imply it is a u.s. problem. weeed immigrants to grow our country to emigrate to be successful. what you're implying is there is something really wrong and we want to fix it with immigration and i'm not sure they believe that or is immigration some of their bigger issue about american exceptional as some. this economic issue i'm not sure there is something really wrong. >> i would answer that by focusing on immigration and the president and state of the union address talk about the immigration for long-term prosperity job creation. i'm interest on the immigration angle because t tide of immigration and innovation.

i think there are links between the two the various levels we've talked about in ter of start-ups and contributions to the knowledge and so on and that's the crucial link. the united states as the guilaume innovation in the past. the worry that i have is going forward if we don't do as well what is that going to mean for our economy over the next to estimate time can jacobson, a recently released democratic staffer. on the incentive structure is one of the problems isn't the market trend to send both

productive capacity and high skilled jobs to other countries in recent decades and made the compound now by what we've seen in the last couple of years in the market lack of investment at home companies are sitting on a lot of cash. i wonder what message that sends to people about whether the skills are going to be applicable with places like eg and intel doing so much research abroad. and somewhere else and they come here so pesumably they are willing to go someplace else or go home. they tend to believe you're the number one country on earth and so why would they want to go someplace else. wim wondering about is in the

absence when it comes to innovation it seems from reviewers at least from what i've read about in silicon valley if you have to start a plan and part of the work isn't being done in asia you can't give in to talk to somebody. like question is in the absence of the clear future regarding eitherproductive capacity in the united states and commitment to corporate research in the united states and we are going to have a great deal of succs in young people who are american citizens in the scientific careers. ..

if you combine that with less opportunities for foreign students to get the degrees and stay here, that becomes a crisis we can solve that problem in several different ways. american students are not studying in this field and if we are not providing opportunities for foreign students to stay here, it affects the crisis . >> most of us the benefit that

the -- believe that we benefit from this. we hope we can fix this so that we do not have the bottlenecks that we have that so many different levels. if you have to simplify the question, can you resolve these innovation issues by what he calls the american fear of being a diminished giant fax can you address this by shoring up the supply side the arts you have to have heavy investment in r&d. you have to work on the demand side as well as the supplier. the domestic pipeline will respond if the appropriate incentives are there.

>> i wish we had more time. of want to thank you all and end by to back for the next session. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] 1] [unintelligible]

>> complex, a panel of former white house press secretaries talking about the changing nature of the media. they will talk about jobs, medicare funding. washington journal, every day at 7:00 a.m. eastern. then a look at the future of egypt live at 10:00 a.m. eastern from the hudson institute. c-span brings public affairs to you, created by cable, it is washington your way. not a discussion with former white house press secretaries on the changing nature of the news media. george washington school of media and public affairs hosted the get. it is about 90 minutes.

>> good evening and welcome to george washington university. we provide of students and neighbors with a front-row seat in the theater of history. tonight is no exception. with a flight is to have for former white house press secretaries who have spent two decades of american history. this event is the extension of a

teaching role last semester at our record school of political management. i am glad that we are joined by a senior white house correspondent from cnn. this program live from the white house, making in shaping the news is part of a series hosted by a former cnn white house correspondent and emmy award winning journalist who now serves as director at the george washington school of media and public affairs. please join me in welcoming frank. [applause] >> thank you very much. what a great proud to -- what a great crowd. i think he will hear a conversation that you will remember.

i want to thank the support of the university for helping to make this conversation series possible as well as dean of the arts and sciences. i would like to thank our national council members who are here and the great students of the school of media affairs. also a word of thanks to the graduates school of political management who helped us put together a wonrful reception for our guests this evening. this event is produced by the center for innovative media and periodically we meet with people in this remarkably public sphere of life to discuss the direction of the country, the role of the media and the way we now communicate as a society. in the past start guests have included hillary clinton, tom

ridge and the late tony snow. we examined this remarkable intersection of media and public affairs because that is what we do. we study and explore political communication. tonight's event is an ideal place for those here in washington to explore this strange intersection. i am happy to say it is being broadcast live on c-span. it will air multiple times on the satellite radio and will be heard on the potus channel. i am also privileged to have as one of our visiting fellows

cnn's senior white house correspondent, ed henry. eyewash ed with -- i watch ed with a close eye. everyday he reports to work at the white house, not a bad address. he is teachg a course this semester along wita former white house press secretary who is unfortunately not able to be with us. he passes along his regrets. a few days ago he was having the surgery and his leg was broken, so he has just gone home. he has started his physical therapy and sends his regards. it took a broken leg to keep him away. we know we are doing something right. ed teaches with joe. i have asked him to get us

started with a brief remarks on what is at stake when he goes to work at that place called the briefing room. please welcome ed henry. [applause] >> thank you, every buddy. it is really great to be here with frank because we have a new blog at cnn.com. we just d this tribute to ronald reagan. when i was growing up i did not know much about ronald reagan himself. what i learned i learned through the journalists covering h. they set the standard of keeping politicians on this. the carrot that they took to the craft of journalism is what inspired me to try to one day become a white house correspondent. i was always impressed with their work, especially frank.

he was covering ronald reagan when he was 15-years old. earlier today i got an e-mail inviting me to a farewell party for robert gibbs. it said the nation's highest- paid kindergarten teacher is finally leaving the classroom. [laughter] i thoughit was funny until i realized it was an insult to my colleagues and i. i have been here since march 2006. ari fleischer backstage threaten to turn this around and have the former press secretaries asked me questions. but my point is that i can tell you having done this for five years this is serious business. when at cnn beside me to the white house i was a little scared. this is a big beat. capitol hill is big, but it has

a narrower scope of domestic politics. for the first time i went out on the north lawn and have covered through crisis in north korea and egypt. i know every word i under is dissected here and abroad. people in dozens of countries watching these reports on their iphones. with the social media there is even more pressure to get the story purse and to get the story right. the pressure that we have as journalists, multiplied that when you talk about press secretaries who are at that most public podium. their words can come back to haunt them. we have seen the cover-ups that literally can change history.

so the work we have to do to make sure we get our reports right, you have to multiplying it even more for what these press secretaries have to do. that is why i have enormous respect for all the people coming up here. it is a story i want to pass along when i was covering the bush white house. and it was one tony snow was the white house press secretary. thankfully he left behind lot of lessons that can teach us about how to carry ourselves. he had just come from fox news over to the bush white house and i was at cnn so there was already that. i was pressing him on the war in iraq. one time it reached a boiling point and tony said zip it.

it came out of nowhere. a few days later at bombed into him on the north lawn and we were talking to him. from a distance his assistant saw us and thought we were close. he said pretty soon i am going to have to buy you guys some boxing gloves. tony said something i never forgot, he said this is not personal. ed has a job to do and i have a job to do. the decisions of enormous gravity that presidents have to make. there needs to be a healthy dose of respect on what we call both sides of the podium. not for it -- without further ado, i will bring back frank. [applause] >> thank you very much. our guests tonight have given

voice to all the incredible history, from black hawk down to the impeachment of a president, 2 9/11. their job is may be impossible to represent the president, to articulate policy and communicate with a skeptical world, to manage the media. to tell the truth or we hope and trust not to lie. when dee dee myers step to the podium there were about 50 active web sites. when dana perino left the job there were 20 billion web sites.

how times have changed. whether we believe the impression or t information is credible, it is only three years. tonight we will explore the role of the white house press secretary with people who have articulated and shaped this remarkable history set against this phenomenal media backdrop that we a shared in one form or another. i would share one story with you and you will hear many more. after 9/11 i was a bureau chief at cnn. ari fleischer was the press secrary. he iniated a pool call to the network bureau chiefs and said we are in a different time now.

the country has changed. what you must understand is what you say and broadcast will be seen in afghanistan at the same moment it is seen in albany. he had special instructions we may talk about but he was asking us not to report on the whereaboutsf the president. it was a really sobering moment. we know the world continues to change in sometimes unpredictable ways. let me start by bringing out to you and men who was the press secretary to bill clinton at a rather compelling time in his presidency. mike mccurry, press secretary for 1994 to 1998. [applause] i hope many of you know from

your experience with her directly in class -- apparently she is a twitter phenom. dana perino. [applause] >> look what i did. there i go. torry fleischer was press secretary at a remarkable time in our htory, 9/11, the war in iraq. among other things he is deeply entrand-sports. ari fleischer. [applause] finally, as i mentioned when she became the first female white

house press secretary, dee dee myers took a job -- i am having trouble with these monetarists -- at a very important time. [laughter] we are off to a great start. ladies and gentlemen, dd miers. [applause] >> i am going to sit down and try to be safe he. how many watched the super bowl last night? [applause] how many green bay fans do we have? how many steelers fans do we have? i will put you on the spot. none of us raised a hand because we learned to not take sides. >> before the game barack obama

sits down with bill o'reilly of fox news for another contest, a secretary is, good idea or bad idea. >> gat idea. it is live and there is no editing. everybody in america is in a good mood. bill o'reilly knew that. i thought president obama answered wonderfully. he was that likable person you remember from the campaign. >> i heard some people say it is not diified enough. >> he is showing he can take on bill o'reilly. >> the lion's den takes us to the next topic. i want to start with you, we have a real time crisis in the world which we are watching closely.

i am talking about egypt and the unfolding crisis. the president and white house has called for a transition. they said it should be now but there has been some confusion over what know means. do you know what the policy is? >> not really but understand it is involves -- i think that one of the problems yesterday was having two different spokes people from the administration and president obama speaking at the same time. when you are in a crisis you should probably feel thingout. >> this is one of the great examples of the complexity of this job in the global world we live. if youre a white house secretary or state department spokesman you are speaking to

multiple audiences simultaneously and you have nuanced messages you are delivering the ambassador has a specific message he is delivering to president mubarak. that may not be the same message you want a global audience to reach. how do you target days msage in a time when everything is instantaneously verbal? >> mubarak has to be there until september. meanwhile we have people saying the transition needs to begin now. confusing? >> this is the reality of when something is so hot and sensitive. i think you are hearing in the intense focus on the subtleties. i happen to think -- don't tell anybody this, that obama is handling this quite well.

>> this is one where you want to be slow and steady. slowly say goodbye tpresident mubarak and slowly pushed for reform. if you think what you are watching now is chaos, just wait until the army decides to settle it. then a gets really massi with a lot of loss of lives. he knows that and he is trying to walk the tightrope. >> i will let you watch a little piece of that type rove -- will piece of tight rope robert gibbs has been walking. i think we have it. let us let you take a look at this.

>> now means yesterday. when we said now we met yesterday. this is -- now started yesterday. the time for a transition has come. that time is now. you are asking me if now is september? it is unseasonably warm but it is not september. [laughter] >> bring back memories? >> the meaning of the word is [inaudible] [laughter] [applause] >> i think each of us could probly name 100 times we wish we had it to do over and explain more articulately as our co- pilot. it is hard when events are breaking and you are trying to

walk that fine line and send the right messages to t right audiences. and sometimes you step too far over the line. >> usually you have your best thoughts at 1:00 a.m. >> what happens if you don't expect that question? >> not in my office. that was kind of the role. the worst thing that could happen would be for me to be surprised at the podium. i can remember a few times where -- [laughter] >> one thing that has changed is because of the 24/7 news cycle reporters are asking questions all day long, so by the time you ha gotten to the podium you knew what they were going to pass. you could tell where robert gibbs was looking. that is where ed henry sits. you know where they are

generally trending and you know what they need to get on television. >> he was trying to diffuse the moment and in the questions. >> this is a good example of something important. these are the raw ingredients of news coverage of the white house. i've -- it was an idiot who allow the tv cameras to go in there. that would be made. [laughter] when you are trying to tease out the calibration of what a statement makes that the prident has made means, it is not supposed to be carried live on national televisi. it is supposed to be what reporters used to go to other sources and formed a story they present to the american people. >> you brought cameras to the briefing room. >> a bad idea when monica lynn

steed came along. -- when monica lewinsky came along. >> let's come back to the crisis and talk about this moment because this is the serious business. sending messages from the white house podium, ari, i know you were there when the war started and took place. what role did you play in sending messages? were you conscious you were the messenger? >> on september 12, that was the first time george bush declared war publicly. that night when he addressed the nation he spoke of reassurance and the next day he deliberately showed up and used the word of war. that changed everything because all of the sudden york press secretary -- you realize troops

are starting to move. that sense dramatic signals around the world. it was my job to make the statement that saddam hussein has 48 hours to leave. >> you issued the ultimatum. was that a deliberate strategy? why the white house press secretary? >> it was a la-minute issue with prime minter blair. we were hoping to saddam hussein would leave the country. it appeared that he would. it was a last-ditch hope to say he has 48 hours. i said saddam hussein has 48 hours to leave otherwise the consequences will be immediate. people jump from their seats and iran. >>id you know you were going out tre?

>> i did not want reporters to jump from their seats. >> did you push back and trailed those who said we want you to say this? >> no, you knew eventually it was going to happen one way or the other. for six months i was getting prepared for it. what signals did y send the liberally from the podium? >> new kind of caught me -- i did not have to send any to saddam hussein. i was thinking today about when president clinton in his first year was putting together his first budget. one of the things we were doing as the country was coming out of recession. we were trying to send signals to the financial markets that the president was going to move towards a tax deficit reduction.

we tried to send those markets to get some response so we could show the markets would respond positively. that is one example of a less militaristic situation. it was successful. weaver able to use this positive feedback we were getting. >> when you go out there with a signal like bad when we are in the middle o egypt like this you have multiple audiences. who are you talking to and how do you calibrate your message to reach those audiences? >> sometimes when you are the press secretary you can walk out into the briefing room which is a lot smaller than it looks on tv. in some ways you can get caught up in answering questions to the 20 people assembled there and u forget people are listening to you. i remember being surprised there

were two places i was recognized more than anyone else. it was south korea and israel. i think that was because at the time the north koreans were quite aggressive in their diplomacy. and theouth koreans would watch every day because they want to know is america still with us? that was the same with israel during the 2007-2008 timeframe when we were looking for a way to get prime minister abbas and olmert to come to the table. that is the one piece of advice i pass on to robert gibbs. don't forget while those people in the briefing room can drive you crazy people all aroun the world are watching because they want to know where the leader of the free world stands. >> you are very unusual among

white house press secretaries because you have an experience with the state department. >> i told president clinton of the two great job as he gave me that was a more challenging job to be at the podium of the state department because it was harder work. it is a much more substantive press corps. they'll have graduate degrees and don't go for a lot of the silly stuff that happens for the white house. if you have to rise up and express righteous indignation from the white house podium on a matter of critical foreign policy substance after you have been engaged in some political sparring about the republicans are doing, it is jarring for the american public because they don't know which hat you are wearing.

are you the official spokesman on behalf of the u.s. government? we developed conflict in this role for the press secretary that needs to be resolved. probably all of us agree we were better off when we brought other people in. so that they could actually speak on behalf of the u.s. government. i have been concerned to many of the political actors who worked for the present and migrate into the role of being official spokespeople on matters of state. the briefing since mike allow the cameras in it has become a tv show. that is not the real relationship between a spokesman and the press corps. reporters play their aggressive role. they really fire away the questions.

i do the same thing and give the answers. the real work is done 20 times a day when they walk into your office and talk one-on-one with you. >> i am going to conclude that the american public will not be well-served. what happens to the information that is supposed to be coming from that podium? >> the public recognizes they get their news from a tremendous number of directions. i think one of the things we have to do -- we are in the 21st century and are using a 19th century format to educate the press corps. one person no matter how good looking standing at that podium each day and all the news funnel in through the white house is an antiquated way for the american public to get its information. we have to reinvent the public function within government and

marginalize the role of the press secretary. >> tre is one thing i want to add to that. every day you see the press secretary defending the president. would you don't see isefending the press to the president and senior staff. that is never seen. you are trying to make sure the press corps can get into the median. that happens a lot. one of the most important roles of the press secretary was to protect the role of the press. to remember that they had a job to do. tony snow once said -- it is a really important role to remind everybody that while they might drive you crazy, it is what has made our country so great. >> give us an example of when you have pounded on the desk of

the oval office and said -- >>he big issue is access. they will not be satisfied until they can watch everything 24/7. the press secretary's job is to fight for as much of that is reasonable. on september 13 the president was going to call mayor giuliani to announce he was coming to new york the next day. that was the famous bull horn moment. i suggested let the press handle it. >> what was your motivion for that? >> i thought it would be good for the country to see the president talking to the leaders. >> that is actually where he got emotional. he feels like i do. >> a reporter asked him a question, how do you personally

feel about what is going on? for the first time with the cameras rolling, an emotional man? asked an etional question. he said something along the lines oi and a caring kind of guy but my job is to care for the people who are the vicms and not worry about myself. he was about to lose it. >> there are those who would say that to bring the cameras in to a moment like this is stagecraft. >> he took questions after that phone call. people are yelling about each other about a divided policy my answer would be of course not. >> this bears directly on this.

we solicited questions online from those who wer attending and others who might be interested. they were voted upon. this one is from aaron. he asks when is it ok to with that -- knowingly withhold ever mission on behf of the white house? >> never. >> those are two very different questions. [laughter] >> i famously got in trouble. sometimes the art is telling the truth slowly i listened to you do a lot of that. >> all of us have had situations where we know things are going to happen but we cannot talk about them because sometimes you might put someone's life in