>> the commander has they'd go out to press to engine cut off as expected. in about a minute and a half. >> discovery, you are single engine pressed. >> seven minutes 15 seconds into the flight. traveling 7,200 miles per hour. downrange, 615 miles. discovery's engines throttling back to keep the forces on the crew to three times that of gravity.

less than 30 seconds to go in discovery's powered flight. we are coming up on main engine power cut off. main engine cutoff confirmed. space shuttle discovery now in space.

external tank separation confirm. commander steve lindsey will steer the shuttle so the camera can capture images of the tank. >> we saw nominal -- welcome to you and your veteran crew back to space. >> copy. thanks a lot. good to be here. >> we will meet you at the post- homes one tab. >> that is where we are headed.

>> as we take a look in slide flight control center, we want to welcome you to nasa television's live coverage of discovery's final flight. you can always fall along at the nasa web site at nasa.gov. at this point, crew members are in the process of unstrap and themselves to go up to the flight deck. >> space shuttle discovery successfully headed into space. taking a load of supplies. this is the 39th flight of discovery, logging more than 143 million miles in its history.

after discovery, nasa has two an additional discovery launches. endeavor is scheduled for april 19. that crew includes an astronaut who is the husband of gabrielle difference. we will take you to the pentagon. the airforce will announce the winner of one of the biggest contract in history, to build nearly 200 airborne refueling tankers. the company's bidding for that are boeing and eads. we will have it for you at 5:10 eastern on c-span. >> the annual winter meeting of the national governors'

association. live coverage throughout the weekend, on c-span. >> sunday, mike huckabee promoting his current book. he shares his thoughts on president obama and responsible -- and his thoughts about the 2012 presidential election. sunday at 6 18:00 p.m.. >> in a few minutes, we will take you to the pentagon for their news conference, announcing the winner of that airborne refueling contract that is set for 5 up 10. we will go there live. doug commodores's comments earlier today, saying the economic recovery is underway. you can see all of this later on this evening in our program on c-span. 2021.'s focus on

assuming the continuation of policies, the projected backup will be larger than almost any budget category. the left hand bar shows a revenue and then the deficit. the right hand bar shows spending. this assumes the continuation of the policies i just discussed. under those circumstances, balancing the budget would require an additional cut in spending of about 1/4, an increase in tax revenue of 1/3. what would it mean to spend -- to cut spending by 1/4 > -- ? it is almost as much as combined spending on medicare and medicaid, ward and spending on defense.

on the other side what would it mean to -- mean to raise revenue? that would mean more than tripling revenue from the income tax or a substantial increase from the individual income tax. one might ask how we dealt in the past few decades with the budgetary impact of rising social security and medicare spending. the next slide it tries to answer that question. the principal factor has been a marked decline in defense spending relative to gdp. the end of our current tenure protection, and a lot happened between those years. i do not mean to say that over the right. it is helpful to see 1970

through 2007. total outlays were not that much difference. within the outlays, there was a short -- sharp change of composition. social security, medicare, medicaid increase in the past four years by over 4% of gdp. defense spending fell relative to the gdp, by a little or over 4%. the extra pressures imposed by increases in spending in these programs was absorbed by reduced spending on defense, relative to the size of the economy. that pattern cannot repeat itself. there is a debate about the appropriate level of defense spending. it cannot fall by more than 4% of gdp. these programs are continuing to rise very rapidly, rising

almost as much relative to the gdp over the next 13 years -- that is bad. we're ok. had those things in front of you. defense spending, the other categories, social security, that is rising very rapidly, hah because of the aging of the population, and the rising of health costs. if you turn to the next slide, i can try to just throw it up before you, it shows bars that compare that in united states to get in the other countries. it would continue on the path of having debt held by the public as large as gdp by the end of the decade, we will be entering territory that is on for merrier -- unfamiliar to other

countries. the debt in other countries is also rising, but it is unclear that we take much comfort in the fiscal challenge is taking place in other countries. to prevent death from the covering -- from becoming unsupported, congress will have to raise revenues significantly, cut spending, or pursue some combination of those approaches. in the last slide, along with the necessary adjustments are delayed, the greater will be the negative consequences as a mounting debt. hot the more drastic policy changes will need to be. changes of the magnitude that will be required could be destructive if. congress may wish to implement them gradually to avoid a negative impact on the economy, as it recovers from a severe recession.

so also to give families and businesses and state and local governments time to plan and it just. allowing for gradual implementation would mean that readying the fiscal imbalance would take longer and that actions would need to be taken at sooner. thank you. i will stop there and will take your questions. yes. [unintelligible] there have been nations that have made recommendations -- >> there have been a number of points of criticism from a variety of people with

different economic and political views. the criticisms have fallen into major categories. one is taking along at face value. some people think we have not estimated -- -- misesteimated the costs and the savings. there are people who think we have under estimated the savings that will be achieved in medicare in particular from the changes in the legislation. we have worked very hard to trying to put our projections in the middle of the distribution of possible outcomes, recognizing there is a wide distribution for both the costs and savings, that we are embarked on a course through the legislation that goes in have much experience with, and estimates that are produced are necessarily going to suffer from a great deal of uncertainty. the role -- but we are

comfortable with having laid out projections that are in the middle of the distribution of possibilities. the second sort critique, very different, but worth emphasizing is people who say the law will not unfold as written. whether or not we are correct about the implications of that, people who say those provisions are not the ones that will be in place when one gets to 2015 or 2020 or behind. our job is to make the effects of the legislation in front of us, not to predict what future congresses will do. if future congresses to make changes, we will analyze the effects of those changes on the bench. in one area we had emphasized we think some of the changes in the legislation, especially in the slower growth of medicare spending that is envisioned, my people to sustain for a long period. and because of the uncertainty

of that particular piece, we have shown estimates of things that happen if those cuts are not sustained. on the second question, the plants that have been put forth, we did make -- we do not make policy recommendations. what is -- what strikes me as new and important is that a number of groups of people have laid out with some degree of specificity what they would do to remedy the nation plus fiscal imbalance. there is the official commission work, but there is also " reports from other organizations and other individuals, and these recommendations cover a wide span of possible policy changes,

but i think the fact that these things have been laid out in black and white, with numbers and some justification, think that creates a very important groundwork for serious discussion about what directions to proceed in. i think both the fact that these various plans, more than one of them alon-- >> we're taking you live to the pentagon for an announcement, the award of the contract for the airborne refueling tankers. >> we committed that the process would be to driven by clearly stated requirements defined by the war fighter, and we committed to a fixed-price contract structure that would deliver the air force a capable aircraft at the most

competitive price. under the oversight of doctor carter, the undersecretary of mrs. six and technology, the airforce has made good on these commitments. let me get to what you really want to hear and have the secretary make it a's announcement. >> thank you, sir. it is a pleasure to be here to formally announce the results of the source selection process for the air force's number what acquisition priority at operation needed. kcx represents the first in a series of procurements to replace our aging fleet. last year we came here to announce a strategy that emphasized our aim to provide a much-needed refueling platform that would enable the war fighter to go to war on day one.

this meant a clearer and disciplined approach to requirements, recognizing the importance of providing this capability at a price the taxpayers could afford and a clear description of how the evaluation would be conducted. we have now completed the source selection process as described in the process of looking at proposals. the violation phase spanned seven months and resulted in an extensive official record. all offers were aware from the very beginning of how the if i wish it would be conducted. the source selection yves i wish a team was composed of 230-plus person joint multi-agency group, seasoned acquisition, maintenance, and operational experts. they conducted multiple internal reviews throughout the process to ensure a consistent, thoroughly documented, and will

support evaluation record. to all of them, we say thank you. source selection team's work understandably so, immune from some speculation and opinion that the company's acquisition programs and especially ones of this magnitude. they do so because they realize that this is not about opinions. it is about the integrity of the source selection process as embodied in statutes, regulations, and case law. that is also why we have worked throughout this process the carefully developed a comprehensive record of our work. i would also commend the companies for the quality of the effort they put into these proposals. this was a spirited competition with both offerers acquitting himself -- themselves well.

as promised, we have had ongoing and transparent dialogue with the offerers to make sure we had a clear understanding of their proposals and they would have a clear understanding of our analysis. we have also responded to requests for information from members of congress, and we appreciate the manner in which our oversight committees have respected the acquisition process and its legal underpinnings. when it came to requirements, we wanted to make absolutely certain that the of war fighter was still in charge of stating their requirements, and that if those requirements were met, we could go to war on day one. general shorts and i are confident that when our young hollow -- pilots see this aircraft, they will have the tools they need to be successful at what we ask them to do.

we promised a fair, open, and transparent process, and we continue to deliver on that today by sharing publicly those elements of our analysis permitted by statute, federal acquisition regulations, and prior case law. information that is considered proprietary or less for source selection sensitive will not be six discussed. out of desperation that offers as the process continues for three in short, today's statement will be the end of our information. this selection process determine whether or not the proposals developed -- and whether non mandatory capabilities would be addressed. it also took into account fleet

commission effectiveness and life cycle costs, as an bottled in fuel efficiency and military construction costs. we've been requested and received final proposal revisions from each offerer. here is the information that we're able to release. both offerers were deemed to have met the requirements and were considered affordable. because the difference between the total if i waited prices in present value terms was greater than 1%, yielding substantial savings to the taxpayer, the non mandatory capabilities, while evaluated, with not used -- were not used in determining the outcome. the contract awarded today is for the engineering and manufacturing development, the emd phase, which is valued at

more than $3.5 billion. the overall program is valued at over $30 billion, with a final the mouth -- the amount depending on the options exercised. the program will deliver the first aircraft by 200018. if we the kc46-a. the air force will be available to debrief officers at their request. we have indicated to congress our willingness to respond to questions, subject to the limitations i have outlined earlier. we will have no other public comments following today's announcement is to allow for that crosses the plate out as it should between the government and the companies vault. we hope all parties will

respect the decision and allow this important procurement to proceed unimpeded. the war fighter deserves nothing less i will say that as far as the timing of today's announcement is concerned, it was event driven. with of the time to make sure that the offers were deemed acceptable, that there was a clear understanding, and a fair and objective analysis was completed and provided multiple teams the opportunity to review our work for accuracy and documentation. we have done exactly what we said we were going to do, and we took the time to do it right. a final frequent question regards -- we have consistently said basing decisions are made in a separate process that involves other organizations in the air force. that process will take place in

the course of the next couple years. to the men and women of our air orce, today's announcement represents a long overdue start. your air force leadership is determined to see this through. and we will stand behind this work. today, based on all he violated criteria, christ, and the results of a well-documented process, we announce that the air force has selected the kcx proposal provided by the boeing company. >> no questions at all? >> we will take a few questions, but there is a lot of proprietary-sensitive data. >> was it a relatively closed competition o?

owls edge this out? >> boeing was a clear winnder. >> had the we respond to people who thought that eads was a better bang for your buck? >> we went through a process that evaluated award-fighting requirements, the guy when the price, life cycle costs, and the process yielded to the result it did with boeing winning. >> we outlined a request for proposal, and the acquisition strategy very clearly a year ago, and we follow that process to conclusion. >> if i am correct, the emd

contract from 2008 was a lower price, so what are you getting for this $3.5 billion fee you get airplanes, how much fight tests you get? >> is a completely different competition. we indicated that from the beginning. emd phase includes four aircraft, but we have nothing more to say about comparing prices or costs from one competition to another. we indicated from the very beginning that this was a new competition. >> for either winner or loser? >> are there concerns about protests that could be real -- derail this? >> as we have said, from a year

ago, when we first came before you, we think we have established a clear, transparent, and open process. we have executed on that, and that will to protest. >> do you believe that over the decade it has taken to this point in finding a new tender, it has taught the department of defense and lesson that will help in future processes that it does not take a decade and three different selection process is to buy something so important? >> i think we have learned important lessons from this process, and we have tried to reflect them in this competition the way we have structured it. >> we have learned a number of classes. we may the requirements of very clear from war fighter. we said that 366 days ago, and also contracts are fixed-price

contracts, which is reflective of our believe that this is a tanker that can be well specified and modified,, and this reflects our efforts to deliver better value to the taxpayer and the capability of the war fighter in a budget circumstance which we all realize is not want to give us more and more money every year. we are trying to manage a but , and this is reflective of the kind of discipline in acquisition that is required. >> is it your understanding that this tanker will be built in f tourette, washington, and what is your message today for those workers? >> we think both companies did a terrific job. boeing was successful, both indicated -- both made strong

offerings. >> i would just say that i am pleased with how this has produced an outcome after an exhaustive effort by hundreds of the department's very best people, that we will get about delivering a capability that is long overdue and we will stop talking about it. >> is the airforce going to pursue a strategy to replace the remaining tanker? >> guest. -- yes. >> will you allow for work to begin before the protest. runs out, or will you wait if there are protests to begin work? >> the contract is signed or will be very shortly. we have given offered authorization for that this afternoon. orchid will be able -- work will

be able to begin. we are in the process of debriefing the offerers. >> when is the degree in schedule? >> they have to request it. >> for the second and third phase, boeing is not guaranteed those phases? >> that is correct. >> this is for the first 179 aircraft. >> eads confident they had a better plane at a price, and you anticipate it will protest, and what would that mean for the production time line? >> as i indicated, the unsuccessful offerer as the opportunity to pursue a protest if they think they have a grounds. we have put together a process

that was fair and open and does not provide grounds for protest. >> how does past performance figure into the violation process of this competition? >> past performance was part of the mandatory requirements, so it was a requirement becoming qualified offerer. both passed that test. it qualify fully both of these offerers to artisan date. >> is there any more information of how the oversight process was handled? >> the source selection, as we indicated, was in the air force, and it was an individual in the air force the was the source selection of party as we indicated when we should be rfp.

there were members of my staff elsewhere in the department, experts and overseer's, that participated in the technical evaluation and also to insure that the process was free and fair in the way -- and follow the rules the rfp issued a year ago. >> have you gotten any indication from eads that there will be a protest? >> just before we came on, we inform both offerers of the results. >> can you give us a sense of how many of them mandatory requirements eads was unable to meet with >> both companies met both of the mandatory requirements. >> three years ago, you s

elected eads. now you are selecting boeing. how can you account for that turnaround? account for the prior competition. we have based it on a variety of factors, and boeing the clear winner of that process. >> all right, folks, thank you very much. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011]

>> boeing beat out eads. the associated press reporting it was welcome news in washington state and kansas, where of much of the work will be done. representative of kansas says kansas can expect around 7500 jobs and more than $288 million in annual economic impact because an american company is building the tanker. awarded to boeing this afternoon. we will tell you about our prime-time lineup. lookl start back at a back at the dayton peace accords. this includes former secretary of state madeleine albright. then a panel at the university of miami looks at the health care law and its future. that getting under way at 8:00

eastern on c-span. this weekend, the governors will talk about how to grow economies, education, and cybersecurity as they gather in washington for the annual winter meeting of the national governors' association. live coverage throughout the week and on c-span. >> sunday, mike huckabee promoting his current book. he shares his thoughts on president obama, and his possible run in the 2012 presidential election. watched c-span's road to lighthouse, sunday at 6:00 27:30 pm. >> the conference of mayors holding its annual winter leisure it in washington. they held a news conference to talk about the cuts planned for the community development block grant program passed in the u.s. house budget bill last week. the news conference this about a

half an hour. >> good morning. i would like that of all the mirrors present your introduce themselves and the cities they serve. i'm elizabeth couts president of the u.s. council of mares. >>-- of mayors. >> michael nutter, mayor of philadelphia. >> gastonia, north carolina. >> schenectady new york. >> des moines, iowa. >> macon, georgia.

>> mesa, arizona. >> davenport, iowa. >> charlotte, north carolina. >> jackson, mississippi. >> little rock, arkansas. >> city of trenton. >> mirror of the city of miami, florida. >> newton, massachusetts. >> thank you for being here this morning. e are here as amymayors

representing cities. where does the town of us we aren't disappointed about the committee devilment block grant that is being cut. there are other crimes that are critical to cities that are also on the cut list. we take great exception to the community development block grant. this program was promulgated under president richard nixon. this program comes directly to cities for us that control of the funds and to ensure that the funds are used for those folks who most need them and help with projects for the people who are in need of housing. whether that is affordable housing, section 8 housing, and so forth. creates jobs, not just for

people with in city hall, but for the private sector and for non-profits. this program is important to our citizens, and if the members of congress have not thought about the impact that these kinds of cuts have on the members of our communities, they need to know about them. therefore, it is going to be our responsibility to educate them and to make them aware of what the impacts are, not only on the cost sides on the city level, but also on the side of the people who are affected. the impact are devastating. therefore, as we stand here today kamal knowing what happened -- here today, knowing

what happened in the house, we know our only hope is in the senate. this morning, we have met to talk about what we are going to do and how we are one to the fact that kind of discussion. we on the local level balance our budget every year. we also are very transparent. what we believe happened in the house was not transparent, and so we are here to raise the voices for the people who are affected by these cuts, because it is going to affect not only those who are beneficiaries of our community development block grant, but to the rest of the people of our community, because the costs now shift. ladies and gentlemen, every year the people of our community work in our

communities send money to washington, into that treasury. nothing comes back to us, but for cdbg. the community block grant brings those funds into our cities that will help with the social issues that we deal with on a day-to- day basis. these drastic cuts are unacceptable to the mayors of america, and today, as non- partisan mayors, have raised our voices, and with that, i am also going to call on our second vice president, michael nutter, from philadelphia, mr., vice president? , thank you very much. i can only think of one word to

describe what the house has done with hr1 -- "outrageous." it is american. it attacks senior citizens, children, working people, it stops jobs and economic development. cities all across the united states of america. i have no idea of what is calling on in the minds of those who have been elected with rhetoric. he cannot run a country while attacking its own people. certainly not that should not be going on in the united states of america, and that is what hr1 is all about. it attacks programs for seniors and children, who takes and tanks and take steps were needed funds away from the ones who need it the most. it is literally un-american. the u.s. conference of mayors

will not stand for this kind of activity, and we have to do a better job of educating members of the indicted states congress about the programs they find and support on a regular basis. it is clear to us that many members have no idea what these programs do, how they affect people, how they rebuild our cities and put americans back to work. if that then is our job, in addition to running our citizens -- our cities, to educate members of congress, then that is what we will do. we will not stand for this kind of attack on our own citizens. thank you, madam president. >> thank you. ladies and gentleman, the greatest generation of americans helped to build this country. we are now facing a crisis in our cities and towns. we have to take a stand. this generation has to take a

stand. i am not just talking about mayors. i just listened to a lot of different mayors in our meeting. one spoke of 3000 children that go to bed every night without food. people who are unemployed -- we're in the worst economic recession at this country has seen in decades. over 9% above it. at that time when our most vulnerable in our society cannot seem to find a job, cannot seem to heat their home kamal we have this continuing resolution that cuts cdbg funding, the lifeblood of cities and towns. 66%. that is a devastating amount to the people we're talking about this morning. to the young people who we talk about wanting to have an education in the future, to the

citizens that need accessibility. ladies and gentleman, we have to engage our members of the house and senate, governors, who not only say this is irresponsible, but to turn around. we are at a critical junction. i want to say one other thing, and i will give it back to the president. there has been a lot talk about the deficit, deficit reduction. we have to prioritize in our country today, we may -- we have to make some difficult decisions. we have to ensure that we do not balance our budget on the backs of those who are most vulnerable. that is what this hr1 continuing resolution does. we cannot stand for it. we have to engage everyone in our committee. one of the best things about

dcbg funding is it leverages other funds and jobs, private sector and public sector, small businesses, nonprofits. we have to make sure we engage every element of our committee so we do not see the devastation that has been proposed by the house. that is why i am here and that is why we have to get activated across the country. thank you so much. >> thank you. >> flake you. to meet this is about hypocrisy. it is hypocritical for elected officials in washington say they value cities, body the economy, and value jobs, and the decree is stimulus package, send it to the states where it never reaches the cities. it is hypocritical to say you die you the economy and cities and jobs and make drastic cuts degree programs white cdbg grads

who we know have great opportunities to go where they are needed in our committees. we understand tough tresses. there's not a senior -- single mayor who is not making tough choices right now. it is about priorities. the priorities in washington need to be about cities and jobs and the economy. if these proposals go through, those are not priorities. >> thank you. >> thank you. who are we today that are before you? we are the united states conference of mayors. have described us as the city fathers and city mothers of this great nation. what do they do? they try to look out for what is in the best interest of their family and the members of their communities through.

-- kennedy's. where on the forefront, we are where the rubber hits the road, and what ever, knows better the needs of our communities? we're here to tell you today that as city fathers and mothers we will get our fathers -- and our families together. the folks that represent these organizations that work day in and day out for the average people in this country, whether it be day care providers, housing interests, or other individuals, we will get them together. we will take the leadership as the united states conference of mayors, because who else can and should the us? we will have a major march or meeting in the halls of congress with the leadership of congress. we are going to take this fight to save and protect community development block grants to the white house and to the halls of congress and we are not going to

let them destroyed this fundamental basic program that has served this country for over 30 years, and you can take that to the bank, and you can tell congressman, a democrat and republican alike, that this will not be allowed to stand. that is coming from the city fathers and the city mothers of this country who really know what is best for their local communities. thank you. [applause] >> our last mayor, then we will go to questions. >> we are trying to get him to come out of his shell of it. there is quite a bit of passion on this issue. and republicans and democrats alike are committed to this for one reason? i am proud to be a part of this group because behind me are ladies and solomon make the actresses. we balance our budgets.

we take care of our citizens on a daily basis. the problem is if you cut a budget in washington, the problem disappears. it does not. those 3000 children believe -- beneath the bridge cannot. this is a shifting of responsibility and it goes without hypocrisy that he spoke of that. at the disadvantage of our budgets, this will have a direct impact on our citizens. we have continued to balance our budgets. we have continued to make tough decisions. this is an atrocity because it simply ignores the fact that you cannot simply wish away problems. we will stand together, we will fight this because this is one of the most basic principles we

believe then, does affect our citizens on a daily basis. it will affect their daily lives, and it will affect the level of services we are able to provide. >> thank you, and now we will open up for questions. >> we are not here to talk about the federal shot down. that is their business. we are here focusing on cdbg. >> would like ask anybody who kansas, -- who asks, if anybody would like to identify themselves as republican and would like to address which mcconnell or speaker boehner, give us a just of what you would say to their face. >> are non-partisan, and that is the duty of standing together

here as the u.s. conference of mayors. this issue is an issue that has been debated in congress many times and has had bipartisan support. as mayor serves and our citizens, we serve both democrats and republicans, but i would open it up to any of them here to see if they are willing to speak, because as we stand together, we do not know who is a democrat or republican. and we do not care. >> i will be glad to speed. -- to speak. what is your question? >[laughter] >> with any of you identify yourselves as revolving -- as a republican, and how would you address this to mr. mcconnell and john boehner?

hamas we do not need to let just anyone specifically, because they represent communities across the country. they have got to hear from us. it is a little bit lame for us to hear that they have got tough choices to make. you would be a mayor for a day and i will tell you about tough trusses. this is about priorities and the priorities need to be at about the economy. if they cut cdbg they have lost their sense of priority. >>, and the chair of the democratic mayors, and we stand side by side on these issues, and we can while the halls of congress together on that, because this is something about the children, programs that was started by a republican president. this has been a program that allowed us can take you and put

your hands right on the result of these programs. we stand together on this. we may talk about other issues, but paulson did not have a d or r on it. is about the people of this great country, and we stand together on this. >> you mentioned what the house has done, but president obama in his budget proposed cutting cdbg grants. >> if that money is cut, then the 2012 goes that baseline. there's nothing left. it is gone. >> you have no opinion on the 2012 budget? >> we need to fight the budget and win this one. >> we are not going to get distracted by 2012 while we are living in 2011.

that is the issue. 62% cut is something you have to pay attention to, and we will deal with 2012 when we get to 2012. where in 2011. when someone has a bazooka pointed at your head, it is difficult to focus on what you are going to have for breakfast tomorrow. we are focused on the here and now. this program is under attack and many others, as our president indicated, but at 62.5%, we need to stay focused on where we are right at the moment. that is what we are doing. >> is this the first time in the history of the block grants that there has been a strenuous effort to eliminate that funding, and what happened in that case? >> this is not the first time. we have gone down this road many times before, and i believe our

executive officer can tell you how many times the conference of mayors have fought this flight -- fight. >> i think it is important to stop and look at every president since nixon, and what president reagan proposed cuts, and we won. president bush would try to eliminate the program, and with the help of his secretary of hud saved it. this is not the first time, but this i think is more serious and more critical than ever, what we are living through right now. >> of the criticisms of the program is that it is difficult to measure its results, and that

is not republicans saying that. that is what the president says in his budget. what is your response? >> it is a flexible program, and we always want to ask a question and we have asked the question -- where do you start the measure? we can talk about the 3000 children underneath the bridge, that is today. what about next year when we have to look at something? it is a very organic and it is a flexible program and we need to make sure that we address these issues. >> we have to account for every dime. every dime of this program gets accounted, is spent well. this is a 36-year-old program. no one is doing anything.

all of our bridges in our cities this summer if people use them. all this talk that this measure, that measure, talk about jobs -- go talk to a senior citizen living in a hud 202 development. asked them what is the outcome of the funding. most of these folks did not even know that some of the streets they drive on or do anything else on were probably funded with cdbg dollars. tremendous flexibility, a credible accountability. we fill out more forms and we know to do with, so we know what is going on. some of the folks go to groundbreakings and ribbon cuttings do not even know that those activities are funded by cdbg. no every -- we know where every

dollar and dime goes. >> i just want at that we know jobs have beenllico created by cdbg funding. there are over 14 million people that have -- their lives have been affected by cdbg funding. we can talk about data and we can also talk about the lives of the infrastructure, that has been affected by this program that allows innovation. >> one other thing that needs to be pointed out is that this is probably the most transparent program there is. these funds aren't subjected to a very extensive public process. -- are subjected to a very

extensive public process. it is probably the most responsive and the most purely citizen-driven spending program in almost all of government. it far exceeds even our normal budget process. there is not only accountability, there is transparency. it is one of those things, i will tell you, you will truly know about it when it is gone. >> to the point that they want to measure, we have forms that we have to fill out. they are extensive forms. if you want to create measurements, hey, bring it on. >> are these meetings totally focused on the community block grants, or are you focused on

energy efficiency funding? >> right now, this is the bazooka in our face. anyone else? >> i am a mayor from north carolina. i just want to give you a small example of the leverage of funds for community development block grants. the poor and elderly who are homeowners are in danger of losing their homes because they can no longer afford to maintain them. their roots are caving in. their porches are -- their roofs are caving in. their porches are caving in. we took this money and established an account at lowes home improvement. thousands of volunteers bought plywood and materials and have renovated 87 homes of the poor and elderly at a value of over

$1 million in improvements that not only improved the homes of these 87 families, but leveraged the money from 27 belsen dollars to $1 million worth -- $27,000 to $1 million worth of profit. and they kept taxpayers in their homes. with that small amount of money, we were leveraged greatly. when you start talking about accountability, those are the kinds of things that keep our communities driving. when you start talking about taking this a way from the district -- taking this away from the disenfranchised, it is totally and american. >> anyone else? anyone else? anyone else? gone, three times. it was nice of you to do with us. have a good day. >> good job. [applause]

[captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> this weekend, governors will talk about how to grow their states' economies, education, and cybersecurity as they gather for the annual winter meeting of the national governors' association. we will have live coverage throughout the weekend on c- span. >> coming up tonight, a look back to the 1995 dayton peace agreement on bosnia. a number of participants, including the former secretary of state, madeleine albright. that will be followed by a discussion on in the health care law and the challenges ahead, the political and court challenges ahead. that is our prime time lineup

tonight on c-span. on "washington journal" tomorrow, we will look at the national governors' association meeting and get an update on the just announced award to boeing. scott ross and joins us a 7:45 p.m. he is with the group that is opposed to the proposed changes in the wisconsin union contract. following that, the chief economist for the american petroleum institute will talk about how the unrest in the middle east is affecting oil prices throughout the world. we will wrap up the program with charlie cook and his latest views -- his views on the latest gallup poll on party affiliation in the u.s. next up, from this morning's post a washington journal -- this morning's "washington journal." our presence is so expensive and what is keeping it that way?

guest: corrections costs have been going up significantly over the last several years. frankly because we keep incarcerating more and more people. today, for example, can the state of michigan, one out of every the people -- one out of every three people that works for the state worked for the department of corrections. these are institutions that are a secure and we need to protect the public. we need to make sure there is a severe remembered h -- we need to make sure there is a secure perimeter. they are expensive to build and expensive to operate. host: beyond the basic infrastructure of keeping prisoners inside and keeping them out of the public, what are the other costs? we are talking about caring for people and benefits. guest: corrections has done a fantastic job over the years of limiting their costs. more and more, corrections is doing everything they can to

simply warehouses people. the costs are driven primarily by personnel, making sure that you have officers in the housing units supervising people, making sure you have people on the perimeter of maintaining the security of the institution, providing milk care services. prison and jail is one of the only places in the country that you have a constitutional right to health care. providing that is expensive. the overriding costs are the health care services behind walls. host: let's look get this piece from earlier this month. one of every 15 state dollars is spent on corrections in this country.

and it has this pullout that it costs $44,000 to incarcerate a prisoner for one year in california. nearly a same price as a year at harvard university with room and board. guest: many state officials are frustrated that they spend significantly more in many states now on their corrections system than their entire higher education system. that is something that is very frustrating for many state officials. we call this but pacman state budget, which is eating into other priorities for state officials. the state of michigan, according one quarter of state officials worked for the -- one third of state employees worked for the corrections department. the states are trying to balance their budgets. it is one of the second fastest growing line items in state budgets. host: $50 billion spent annually

by states nationwide. the cost of paying for a parolee bursas an inmate is very big. $7 vs $78. guest: you have people incarcerated and you go from a very secure facility, which is expensive to operate. i want to make clear that these systems are running as efficiently as they possibly can. what is driving the cost of these systems to is the number of people that are incarcerated. one out of every 100 adults today is in prison or jail. one of every 31 people under correctional supervision on any given day. they spend a lot of money to lock them up and then they go to the streets and we spend far less to provide them the

community supervision they need. host: mike thompson is our guest. let's hear from liz, a democratic caller in texas. caller: i am curious as to the impact of this private prison system versus the state prison system. pat i am, also, curious as to the impact on state run prisons versus private prisons. because i have a very -- i am very nervous about there being a financial incentive to incarcerate people. if you understand where i am going with the private prisons. as far as prison costs on state budgets, i wanted to know how many of those are for minor offenses, things that can be otherwise dealt wickes. thanks for your time. guest: thanks for your call. to answer the first part, many states are looking at privatizing certain functions in

the operation of their prisons. you'll have corrections with privatizing health care services and food services. some states are contracting with private companies to run entire prison systems. -- to run entire presence, rather. different states have privatized part of their corrections system. the savings that can be generated from that really varies. a lot of states affected, the savings are not as dramatic as they had hoped. many states that probably will not be privatizing much more than they already are. like the people up for minor offenses to, i mentioned the extraordinary percentage of people in prison or in jail on any given day. one out of every 100 adults. one out of every 30 are under correctional supervision.

when states look tax who they are locking up -- when states are looking at who they are locking up, they notice this. one out of every two people is being incarcerated within three years of their release. 50% of the time, that is for a violation of a condition of release. a lot of people want to see how we can do better in helping those people succeed in the community. in many states, you have people going into prison for a very short amount of time, put back into the community and, where housed. -- warehoused. ohio puts people in prison for nine months for low-level drug crimes. many of them have drug problems and don't receive treatment. they are simply put into a crowded prison system, then they are put back on the street with no supervision whatsoever

oftentimes. what type of public safety are we getting for simply turning those people through the system for relatively short time without doing anything that would change their criminal behaviors? host: when trying to combat recidivism, it sounds like it can be an added expense if you are trying to truly reform someone, help give them more opportunity for when they get back outside. that might be a bigger cost at the outset versus the idea of where house -- warehousing. guest: if we are going to do something about prison and jail growth in this country, we have to do something about recidivism rates. given how much states and counties are spending on their corrections systems, if we're going to make progress on expenditures, they have to get better success rates from people coming out of prison and jail. that means providing some services that prepare the people for release before they get out and help them succeed once they are in the community.

host: a recent story states -- guest: what is impressive about michigan has done is they've taken some of those savings that they have generated by actually closing prison facilities and actually read-invested some of

those savings into some of the strategies you are talking about. -- reinvested. there is costs associated with it, but the cost of building and operating a prison is far more expensive. you cannot put a price on public safety. what we really want to see more than anything else is reduced crime. what we are talking about the making sure that these people have jobs when they come into the community is that we address the substance abuse and mental health needs. we are talking about less crime. host: gary is on the republican line from ohio. caller: hi, i have thought about this quite a bit. if it was run like a self- sustained farm where they grow they doing they eatm,

their own cleaning, they do their own cooking, everything, they are self-sufficient, that would have to cut some of the expense. $28,000 a year is ridiculous. or else -- or set them up the way -- if our servicemen can camp outside like in the infantry or the artillery or in tanks and stuff like that, they spend over six months every year outside. and these people, they don't all they need to do is work and sustain their own self while they are in jail. like you talked about, these outfits that are promoting

putting people in jail, that one in pennsylvania and in new york, these are basically kids they are messing with. our present system is sickening. host: what you think about his idea? guest: there's a lot of frustration about how much it costs to run prisons in this country. it seems very appealing to sort of imitate what folks see when they see a tent city in phoenix and say why can we do that just with more people? it is challenging on a number of levels. when you have a minimum security inmates, these camps where you have farms that you are talking corrections systems do that as much as they can. when you are talking about a maximum security prison, putting them in a tent city is not feasible and it is not saved for the people who are incarcerated

and is considered unconstitutional from the federal court system perspective. furthermore, you are dealing with new york state, a lot of these prisons are on the canadian border. these facilities need to be heateed. this is a real practical challenge that the correctional administrators are running into. again, you speak with corrections administrators, they have adopted do to make sure these people are incapacitated and the public is safe from them. also need to run safe and secure facilities. at the end of the day that is an expensive proposition. they are doing it about as cheaply as they possibly can. it is astonishing to see how many inmates are stacked high in double or triple bonds, in large dormitories with one officer for every 200 or 300 inmates. that is a scary job for a lot of people. i don't think a corrections systems can run any meaner than they already are. ho-- any leaner.

host: what about giving prisoners a chance to get away from the lifestyle they are used to, getting away from the tv and the jail and have them experience outdoors, provide for themselves, do farming and things like that, who is doing a -- doing that? guest: an idle mind is the devil's workshop. it is important to keep folks active while incarcerated. people in it is incredibly important for them to receive job training while incarcerated. the majority of people who need that don't get it while incarcerated. why not, because we want to keep the cost as low as possible while these people are locked up. there is far more idleness that people would like because some of these programs do cost money. in order to make sure that you can keep pace with the growth of the prisons and jails and build

and operate more prisons and jails, we need to strip whatever programs are behind the walls. so you end up with a prison and jail system that is even less likely to change inmates' behavior appear that is frustrating for taxpayers and elected officials. host: let's go to detroit, michigan. caller: good morning. you have taken a lot of my thunder. you have excellent comments this morning. i would like to speak from a party as i have spent time in michigan prisons. i've been out since october of 2007. the program that you spoke about, it is not generated jobs for people, unfortunately. i've had 50 years' experience in information technology but i cannot get a job because of my history. i've tried to get jobs anywhere from mcdonald's to grocery stores. in michigan, it is not translated into jobs for us. i was not involved in that particular program, but from what i understand, most of the jobs that they basically put you

in are low-level jobs, which is great for many people. but one thing that i think you already mentioned was the revolving door. what we really need to do, the training is very important, but we also have to focus on what got them there in the first place. basically changing the prisoner mind-set. once i get out, i am going back into business. that is something like selling drugs or whatever. that is what really need to do in this society is change the prisoners mind-set to stop the revolving door. host: let's get a response. guest: i cannot agree more. i go back to the previous caller as well. we spoke about why can we make sure these folks are doing productive things while they are incarcerated and the things that will trace their behavior? that is the direction congress is trying to do, the passage of the second chance act which president bush signed into law a couple years ago, which congress

provided funding for and the obama administration is continuing to make a priority. we have seen leaders from the federal government, republicans and democrats alike, saying that we need to do the things the caller was talking about, to change the behavior of people in the criminal justice system. host: this is a comment from twitter. let's go to a republican in florida, good morning, doug. caller: good morning. just a few things from the outside looking in. there are over 2 million people in jail right now, that's more than russia and china -- over 2 billion people. you said it cost $50,000 to put someone in prison or $50,000 to

put them in college. it appears that you have about 20% of people in prison that are violent criminals and the rest are illegal pillion or non- violent people. you could put 80% of those prisoners in college for $50,000 as opposed to putting them in jail for $50,000 per person. at 25 years, someone caught with a crack rock, that's a 25-year mandatory minimum, after that he gets caught with having cracked rocks, $1.5 million to incarcerate a batsman who got caught with five cracked rocks. we should deport any illegals that are incarcerated presently appear that is 50% of people in jail. release the non-violent individuals. at its 30% out. keep the violent individuals in their who are murderers and

rapists and pedophiles and things of that nature. keep them in there. 80% of the people in jail right now, that takes them out. host: let's get a response. guest: it is enormously frustrating for taxpayers and elected officials that we have prisons and jails being used to detain people here illegally who have committed crimes. the percentage is significantly lower than what the caller stated, but that said, the typically the holdup is the federal government processing these people. states and local are doing everything they can to expedite the return of some of these folks back to the countries they came from. in some cases there is concern that if you release them, they will be back across the border pretty quickly. when someone has committed a serious crime, you have policy makers decided it's more important person do their time. the issue of illegal aliens

becomes complicated quickly. the other point about this aggregating the population and better understand who they are and what the likelihood of , is what we'ds like to see legislators talk about across the country. these are multibillion-dollar agencies in larger states. they have research capacity that is potentially 0. why don't they have that capacity? it is a system that is curiously doing everything it can to make sure it is incapacitating this population and cutting expenses so they no longer have the infrastructure to analyze who is in their system and who is recidivising. the chairman of the provisions

committee for the department of justice and congressman together with other leaders have put some money aside for the justice reinvestment strategy, working with a charitable trust to help states analyze who is going to prison, how long, and what strategy they might employ to get better outcomes. as we look at the data, we see opportunities to increase public safety and spend less money. host: the council of state governments justice center director, mike thompson with us. the nation's prison population has increased more than 700% in the past four decades. states spend up to pin $2 billion every year on prison budgets. on twitter there is a conversation going on. what's your reaction? guest: unfortunately, we hear

many incidents of people with mental illness. after many years of struggling with that person, they feel the only place they can turn to in order to get that person the care that they need is the criminal-justice system. is the only system open 24-7 with a no-refusal policy. when we talk about mental health, we know today it is the los angeles county jail is this country's largest mental health hospital. once people with mental illness find themselves in prison or jail, their condition frequently deteriorates. although they get the mental health treatment they need, because they have a constitutional right to it while incarcerated, it is not the ideal setting for a person with mental illness. oftentimes, initially their mental illness is untraded, so these folks act out and they are often involved in altercations with inmates and staff members, which increases the length of their sentence.

when they return to the community, is frequently with a 15-day supply of a medication. and an appointment list is given to them for follow-up. they are released with a bus ticket on a street corner. we have made significant investments in treating that person while incarcerated, but we have not the best position that person to succeed when they are back into the community. host: to barbara on the line. caller: i have had personal experience with people coming out of prison. one of them has been my nephew. he had everything going for him when he got out except for he was too stubborn to tell the authorities who gave him the drugs to pass. we finally cracked the case. the point that i am trying to

get across that makes me very frustrated is that i have helped at least 10 other people. we had a small business. they got out of tethers and they could get on the bus. [unintelligible] they had a wonderful program going. only one that i had working at my place made the system, because they did not want to be ordered around. i think that they need somebody to say -- boot camp or a work camp or something or whatever to make the idea that after 18 years of age to 30 when they cannot seem to make up their mind to being obedient, work it off and be productive in

society. we cannot all makes $300,000 throwing a basketball or working as a congressman. we have to take jobs that are $5 or $7 an hour. guest: i agree with the comment that we have a lot of people coming out of prison and jail and they need to really change their behavior and adopt a new approach to life, yet they don't seem to want to do that. one of the things that was really interesting about a report that congressman wolfe from virginia together with another congressman commissioned from the national experts across the country, they wanted to know what -- zero in on strategies that would reduce recidivism. so one of the first findings was to focus on resources for the people at greatest risk of

-- greatest risk of offending again. they tend to be younger people and they tend to be disconnected from family and they pop are also people than a not necessarily been living in the same place, who don't have a job to reduce our risk factors that the criminal justice system is starting to really make sure that we are targeting our resources on the people most likely to offend again during this is something the system was not doing before. we were using more gut instincts in terms of how to use resources. the insurance industry would never think of doing that. now we're being more systematic or at least we are trying to be. we tried to take the very few resources and concentrate them on the kinds of people the caller was talking about, because those are the types of people that behavior has to change if we are going to decrease crime and cut the cost of incarceration. host: maryann from california, good morning.

caller: good morning. the caller before last spoke about illegal immigrants in the prisons. i read an article in the l.a. times last may that said california spent $850 million per year on imprisoned illegal immigrants. be after costs -- actual cost was $970 million that california paid 859 million of that. the u.s. government paid $111 million. that is just in california. can you tell me how much illegal immigrants are costing all of us in the united states? we can track whales in the pacific ocean, but not human beings. guest: thank you for your question. again, i think it is a source of enormous frustration how much we

spend in this country to lock up illegal immigrants. when you try to figure out how to reduce those costs, the strategists quickly become fairly complicated. first of all, you have a number of low-level felons, people dust being detained pending deportation. frequently those processes take too long for state and local government perspective spirit that is one driver of the cost. the second driver of the cost is residents in this country don't have a monopoly on who is committing crime. you also have illegals. some of them commit crimes. when they do, especially if it is a serious crime, it is important for law enforcement and the legislators that they at least do some time. it's a very limited percentage of people permitted they have

committed a serious crime and represent a threat to public safety, if there is concern that if you simply deport that person, they could be back in the u.s. committing additional crimes. some of these costs are unavoidable. some could be reduced through more efficient processing your this is something state and local are working hard on now with the federal government. host: there was an editorial yesterday. it talks about the situation and how extensive prison guards are. talk was about salaries of

prison guards and how that is, sharing the burden. guest: you have extreme variations in states across the country. you will get a state like oklahoma, for example, which the average daily cost of incarceration is under $20,000 per year. then you go to other states in the northeast, for example, california, michigan, where the annual cost of incarcerating someone is significantly higher. those are driven by a large cost or personnel their salaries of correctional officers in particular. these are states where the cost of labor is significantly higher. you often have collective bargaining agreements with labor. you have negotiated agreements that end up in some of these states with higher salaries. you go to other states like texas, for example, which has a much lower expenditure per inmate per year. for many years it had a huge number of vacancies among their

correctional officers. according to legislators, they were frustrated with the department for not filling or those positions because the agency was not paying enough in terms of salaries. it is complicated as to why you have those different -- differences in salaries. when you look at the corrections systems across the country, we know that the cost of meals are getting down to $2 dollars a day and sometimes they need only two meals a day. they have cut every possible cost to run these systems efficiently. you are often dealing with crowded systems. the question needs to be the only way we are going to save cost is by beginning to slow the growth of some of these systems or in some cases even closing and the prisons and have fewer employees working in them. it's not the per person cost so much in a lot of ways as it is actual spending less. host: this editorial piece is

making the case that the cost to imprison illegal immigrants convicted in crimes should be a shared responsibility, talking about the balance of what the federal government pays and what the state pays. let's go to michigan, donald, a republican. caller: good morning. a lot of individuals calling in from michigan because this is really a big issue here. one thing that i have noticed and i know that we have talked about this morning, but to talk with specificity about traffic violations or driving violations. this is something that is really impact full to talk specifically about the city of detroit. you can have individuals stuck in perpetuity going in and out of prisons where revisionism because of a traffic violation and happened several years ago. it's a young man is stopped for an expired plate, he did not have the money to renew the plates, or the court costs that he has to pay or fines to the state, if he does not pay those

fines and costs, then there's a warrant for his arrest. and there are more fines and costs added to that. i know individuals in detroit who go in and out of prison for driving violations simply because they don't have the economic resources to pay off something that you and i might find to be somewhat of a small figure. the last point i want to make is that the amount spud of african- americans in prisons in this country, i am embarrassed to see the amount of one demographic that is incarcerated over another. guest: two excellent ponts. first -- points. the criminal justice system does look at fees and fines for

financing the system. we have some counties in texas with 50% of the probation operations are financed by fees and fines that a probationer pays. * that is well into the thousands of dollars or well over tens thousand dollars. sometimes those costs become insurmountable for some people. when they don't pay, they instantly assumed that they are going to be violated after their probation and so they stopped showing up for their probation meetings. when they stopped showing up to a probation meetings, they are astounded and then we issue an want for their best. this is the way the system is playing out. you have competing priorities really in terms of different financial obligations imposing on this population. for example, not only does the person on probation have spines

and fees to pay, but they also have south support obligations and restitution. the southport is required by federal law to be prioritized above the other fees. victims understand that restitution to them will be paid ahead of other expenses to the government. unfortunately, what happens is because we have different collection agents following this person in order to receive the amount of money that they are owed, some of the parties can get jumbled. sometimes we hear concerns that some probation fines and fees and a trumpet other priorities like child support and the victim restitution. to the point about racial disparity, that is something that really concerns everybody working in the criminal-justice system. an african-american male born threefaces a one ouand chance that they will be

incarcerated some time in their life. that is appalling. we want to see changes. the issue of racial disparity in the criminal-justice system is absolutely something that deserves more attention. host: mike thompson, director with the council since 1997. he is launched various national policy initiatives aimed at improving the outcome for people with mental illnesses in the criminal justice system. also, enhancing the ability of people released from prison and jail to succeed in their communities, and increasing public safety and working on issues such as reducing spending on corrections, something we are talking about today. but go to another michigan college, this time from indian river, a bill on the democrat line. caller: good morning. i am retired. i was incarcerated when i was 18 years old. after prison i got into a lot of addictions. thank god i got into recovery.

live appear in northern michigan, we formed a nonprofit group a few years ago. we tried to get one of the prisons on what our idea was, to try to bring community in to the healing process to help young people before they get to prison. we fought with the state three years before they finally broke down. that really -- i don't understand why they take that attitude. we are working now with the re- entry program. i met with a late last week from lansing. we are trying to get a men's group started up here. i have called probation officers and parole officers, zero pit we are trying to get them to come to our group. we have a meeting at salvation army. you cannot even get a return

call. our goal -- i guess i'd just don't understand why they are not more acceptable to outside help. the recovery that i received for the last 20 years has been in the men's wear called the absent fathers. my father committed suicide when i was a kid. it is not a coincidence. 75% of men in prison if never had a relationship with their father. if you took these men's groups that are out here and try to go into prison to help them, they will fight you? and nail. i don't understand that. community and the answer to help this problem. it won't allow them inside. what are your comments on that? guest: i am glad you raised this issue. going back to federal leadership we have seen on this, people like congressman bobby scott and then senator sam brown have

made an extraordinary coalition of folks to emphasize the issues you are talking about pure the role of community and faith- based organizations providing a positive role model, mentoring incarcerated people and connecting with them once they are released, that is something that they made a key component of the second chance act. in fact, close to a thousand people in washington right now focusing on how to make those community-based mentoring efforts more successful as well as other efforts to reduce recidivism. that is something a lot of people are trying to put more emphasis on. your point about the integration of those programs with corrections operations is a fair one. it essentially, you have people running secure facility is who are making sure people don't get out. these are secure facilities. their first instinct is not to figure out how to let volunteers

inside, to help people succeed with reentry. we are seeing more that, but not as much as folks in the community would like to see. that is something we are starting to see change and evolve. tour other point abou probation officers not participating, their caseloads have swelled dramatically due to budget cuts largely, across the country. a former corrections committee chairman in new york city said no one can spend money faster than a disgruntled probation or parole officer. you can make their caseloads as high as you want, but then they return the people to prison or jail and cost the state a heck of a lot of money. in arizona, for every 44 probationers provoked, the state

spends --. we need to help those p >> much more talk about state budgets as the national governors' association comes to town this weekend. we will have a preview of the weekend tomorrow. also, we will discuss the award to boeing. our first guest tomorrow is scott ross, the director of a group opposed to the union contract changes and wisconsin. our next guest will talk about what the unrest in the middle east means to oil prices in america and the rest of the world. we will close up the program with charlie cook and talk about

a new gallup poll on party affiliation in the u.s. every day at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. the associated press is reporting that foreign mercenaries a loyal to muammar gaddafi are attempting to roll back the uprising that visit advancing closer to his stronghold. earlier today, the libyan leader himself said that osama bin lavin and al qaeda are inciting in the uprising -- osama bin ladin and al qaeda are inciting the uprising. this is about 20 minutes. >> their coffee and other drinks.

they let them go out on the streets and commit criminal acts. and they even went to court and destroyed all the records. there criminal files have been destroyed. and they bear arms, and they do not even know what to do with them. they do not even know how to use them. this situation is different from egypt or tunisia. those were people revolting against the government. here, the authority is in your hands, the people's hands. you can change the policy any

way you wish. you can put anyone who is suspected of corruption on trial. is your call. where are the elderly is, the tribal leaders, the head of the families, the head of the some tickets? -- of the syndicates? you have reasonable requests and demands that things be responded to promptly. business is taking -- when business is taking place in a peaceful manner, then we can discuss it. why did al jazeera get involved in these issues?

they have been brainwashing the young people of that area. they are teaching them how to misbehave. and of those enemies who have been training them, those are he ones under bin ladin's influence. those are the ones giving these drugs to your kids. captureing to have to and arrest these people and take them to criminal justice. this is your country and these in our people. -- these are your people. how can you justify such behavior?

of misbehaving people who used to live in peaceful neighborhoods where the goods and supplies were available at reasonable prices. there were no lines. people are getting all of their daily needs. what is the reason for armed robbery? why did you have to get involved with bin ladin and his ideology? you cannot raise families and have a decent life. from tonight or tomorrow, each one should look after his own family and own children.

take care of them. he cannot carry firearms on the street. and you do not see on the streets people who have family responsibilities, people who are married with children, people do have positions in society. they would never carry out such acts. no one in with a better sense would ever get involved in these matters. no one above the age of 20 would actually take part in these events. people with any brains would not take part. they have taken advantage of the young age of these people

because they are not legally liable for punishment. people from 15-18, these bills are given an nickname -- pills are given a nickname. you have to go to all qaeda to obtain the pills. -- al qaeda to obtain the pills, and that is where the kids go to obtain them. they are sort of towards their mentality and make them feel high to an extent that they

started misbehaving. regular libyans are not dragon ged into this.go this is nonsense. shame on you. we were living a decent life and people had no reason to complain whatsoever. the holy koran says to obey god's and obey the profits. -- obey god and obey the prophets.

this issue is because of al qaeda. this incitement has been taking place. our children are incited by people who are wanted by america and the restaurant world. -- western world. the few insiders are limited and very few in numbers. those are the ones we need to capture. you have no reason not to enjoy a decent life. get control of your children. keep them at home. those young teenagers, they are carrying machine guns.

and they feel trigger happy. they shoot. especially when they get stoned with drugs. my brothers, do you not have wise men in norwich -- men in your families, people who can make the wise decisions? do you not think that we should about what has been happening? even the muslim brotherhood are not involved in this.

in theseot involved latest events. those are the followers of the old ancestors in the early age of islam, the muslim brotherhood. they have political demands. they want to apply islamic sharia law, and they need to be recognized as a political party. and they want to become a party like other parties. a long time ago, they resorted to violence, but they have not for the case now. what has been at the in deciding factor behind all of this is al qaeda and bin ladin.

and this is what they have been following. now that the oil flow will be stopped, i wonder how we will be able to obtain a a living since that was to support our families. the majority of the civilians are unarmed. it if they do not go to work, the flow of oil will stop, and then how can we sustain a life? life was easy with available loans, low interest, and people

were taking low interest loans, long-term loans to buy property or to buy cars, or to get married. over 15-20 years to pay back, to buy goods, a commodities. commodities were very cheap, available in the market everywhere. maybe there can be a a revision of salary is -- a revision of salaries or other income. there will be a date.

we are urging people to form new committees in the neighborhoods so that each one can run their own affairs, a company of blood in these communities. pump new blood in these communities. i am just trying to give you parental advice. people like the queen of britain, elisabeth ii, does not have the authority to enact laws.

and that is exactly like my situation. in these neighborhoods, those who have taken your kids away from you and given them the pills, they are launching a campaign against your children. they tell them not to listen to their parents, not to obey their father or mother. do not listen to your parents. do not let them ruin your kids. if people disobey their parents

and end up destroying their country, the same case as in britain, where the queen has been reeling for 57 years. like the same situation, i do not have the authority to impose rules upon the people. i have become more of a symbolic leader. there are institutions that handle these issues. we have the popular committee here and everybody is represented. those should look after these

issues. i do not particularly care about this. i am not interested. it is not a matter of authority. this is an international thing that has been spreading all over the world. [unintelligible] americans flat in the entire areas. -- flattened entire areas. they were accused of having links to osama bin laden. it is all because of been lot and. not only american -- it is all because of osama bin laden. they are fighting al qaeda and

they are fighting terrorism. he has a wrist certain parts of our country. they don't care about you. they do not care about our agriculture industry. all they want is to kill your kids so they can have control. that is exactly what osama bin laden wants. he should be happy now in his jihadist ideas. that is not jihad. the older jihad was when we had the italians occupying our land.

i had handed over authority to you in 1930 -- in 1977. you should take responsibility for your country. even then, they did not believe they could achieve so much success in terrorizing the country. now they cut of main roads, isolate areas, close banks as well as education institutions. as the proverb says, if you carry a leaking back of water, it will make your backside wet.

that is your responsibility. it is none of my concern anymore. if you are happy about living this way, you are my people. you should pay attention to your children. look after them. take them away. find those responsible for inciting them and take them to court. we do not know when this violence is going to come to an end. it is clear. you should take the guns away from the kids. this is the responsibility of

all parents, fathers, mothers, and family members. and then you should arrest those behind them, the ones who have caused all this mess. my condolences to the families of those four people killed from the security forces. i wonder if osama bin laden is going to help compensate the families. here i wait hoping that the town of 1000 marchers -- 1000 martyrs -- please do not disappoint me. otherwise, they might take things in their own hands and rid the country of this dark cloud.

ropeace be on the people. >> earlier today, the state department's spokesman said the u.s. supports removing libya from the u.n. human rights consul. hillary clinton will attend a special meeting of the council on monday to address the unrest in libya. americans and others have not left the libyan capital. this is about 50 minutes. >> there was a transaction last

night. two cases of beer came to the state department to pay off a bet. we have to schedule a beer party. you are saving it for the playoffs. >> i do not think they are going to have much of a team. maybe they can wrestle. >> i would put them up against ross plus berger. -- rothlisberger. has anyone seen him skate? >> not a good look. >> let's begin. secretary clinton and the prime minister met this morning. the secretary and the prime minister discussed the

partnership between the two countries in supporting human rights and democracy around the world. the secretary reiterated the united states' commitment to stability the united states joint many concerned members in supporting this session. the president made clear yesterday that we support universal rights of the libyan people.

that includes the rights of peaceful assembly, free speech, and the ability of the libyan people to determine their own destiny. these are human rights. these are not negotiable and they need to be respected in every country. they cannot be denied through violence or oppression. regarding our ferry, it is still docked in tripoli. the citizens on board are safe. the ferry has been sealed since the people on board cleared customs. we have 285 people on board the ferry. there are 127 unofficial census. private citizens. 40 of our official party, 127

others. 40, 127. let's replay the tape. 14 official u.s. citizens, 127 private u.s. citizens, 118 citizens of other countries. >> that includes family members as well right? more people have decided they are not essential and non the emergency? >> there are probably more people declared non-essentials. >> is there security aboard? >> coming from malta, we put

additional officers and security onboard. >> what are the conditions like? >> i can only imagine. these people have been on the ship for well over 24 hours. i am sure they are uncomfortable. they slept last night on the ship. this is a ship that can accommodate a large number of people. i am sure conditions are difficult for anyone on the ship for this long. they have been moving provisions. they are provisions on the aircraft and on board the ship. they have provided some additional provisions, fruit and so forth, through the course of the day. >> when you say security, is that diplomatic security? >> yes.

>> is the security stationed aboard the vessels? >> we have our own security on the vessels. the point is secure. there are libyan officials in the port area. >> libyan forces are guaranteeing the security of americans on that vessel? >> the libyans are securing the airport at which the ship is docked. we have security officials onboard the ship as well. >> are these people armed? >> i cannot say. this is not a diplomatic post that has marines. >> they are in ipoli. >> the kind of post that you have determines whether marines are present. they are there for a particular

reason. this particular post does not have a marine contingent. >> if this ship holds 600 people and you all have to 85 people, who are the other citizens? -- 285 people on it, who are the other citizens? >> we planned to have a charter flight land in libya today. the weather affecting the ship of facts aircraft coming in and out of tripoli. we hope to have a charter grant tomorrow so we can continue to evacuate citizens who want to leave. my understanding is that there are perhaps 5000 people at the airport today in tripoli. that is from all nations. there are some americans they're

still trying to make commercial connections. -- there are some americans still trying to make commercial connections. we will spend today making contact with americans who still wish to lead. americans should park -- the parts to libya if they are able. >> what if someone decides they want to get off? can they do that? >> right now, i am not aware there is anyone who wants to get off. >> you say conditions are not comfortable. i am wondering if they change their minds. >> as soon as the ship's captain determines it is safe to proceed -- we are in touch with the u.s. government meteorologists who are monitoring the storm system

proceeding through the eastern mediterranean. the moment that ships can safely be part, it will. we expect that to happen in the happen-- depart, it will. we expect that to happen in the next couple of hours. but you say the libyans are securing the port. >> it is their country. but if there is violence in tripoli, what is the perimeter between that violence and the threat of -- >> this is a fluid and unpredictable situation throughout libya, including tripoli. that is one of the reasons we are strongly recommending american citizen is the parts. other countries are doing the same. the violence has occurred and could occur at any time. right now, our assessment is that the area immediately surrounding the vessels is

secure. i am not aware of any current concern about the security surrounding the ship. clearly, we are monitoring that at all times. had we been lucky with respect to the weather, everyone would be comfortably in malta by now. that is not the case paid we will get to that ship under way as soon as the weather permits. >> the security is dependent on the regime in some measure. it beat regime is controlling those forces, they are controlling the forces, correct? >> we are in continuing contact with the libyan government. the under secretary has had two cassations with the -- two conversations. we are expressing our gratitude for the cooperation that libya has shown in helping us with the

evacuation of our citizens and making clear that we remain concerned. we need to continue to have that level of cooperation. >> what happens if the security decides to defect to the united states? >> i want to do a few other quick things. today, in meetings in washington, the united states is continuing negotiations with the european union to ensure the safety and security of all travelers. these negotiations began in december of 2010. they're based on the to thousand seven agreement that continues to be applied provisionally until an agreement is reached. the united states is committed to a goal to build on that current agreement to effectively protect against threats of

terrorism and serious crime while insuring adequate protection of travelers. finally, the los angeles search and rescue team, in addition to the usaid disaster assistance team are in new zealand. they are under way with their operations -- underway with their operations. they have the necessary equipment to make live rescues from collapsed structures. they are working with the new zealand ministry of civil defense. >> back on libya. the statement that you put out this morning about libyan officials telling american officials that un-visa-ed journalists would be considered al qaeda collaborators, who were the total list --who were the

officials? >> there were diplomats of other countries. the compensation was at the undersecretary level. this was the particular topic of the meeting. our feeling was that when we have information that affects the security of u.s. citizens or u.s. journalists or others, we have an obligation to put that out. >> did they say exactly what they meant and why they would deem these people to be collaborate -- collaborators with al qaeda? >> this was their perspective and how they presented this to us. >> i got that. did they explain why?

they felt this way or why they were going to do this? >> i cannot explain this rationale of the libyan government. >> did they mention any organization specifically in addition to the organizations they said they would allow? >> i cannot tell you. >> where you the only diplomat in that meeting or were there other diplomats from other countries? >> there were diplomats from other countries. >> the have confirmations that other journalists are being allowed in illegally? >> i have been listening to reports at the borders. as to how they got there and who they talked to, i have no perspective. >> i have two questions.

you said you recommend people depart libya. but your trouble warning does not reflect that. it does not say we urge people to leave. it just says we urge people to depart if they want to. >> it is our strong recommendation that the situation in libya is unpredictable. obviously, american citizens throughout the world will make their own judgments as to whether to stay or to leave. there are roughly 6000 american citizens who have been registered with the embassy before these events occurred. the vast majority of them are dual nationalists. my understanding is they would need the permission of the

libyan government to depart. there are american citizens who, for one reason or another, remain in libya in the coming days and months. to the extent that you have american citizens who have the ability to be part -- depart, we are helping out as many as we can. those who want -- those who work for private companies have the company charter private transportation. we hope to have a flight tomorrow. we will continue to assess this as we can to help american citizens where we can. >> when the secretary goes to geneva on monday, will she seek to get libya removed from the human rights council? will cc to get support for that?

>> which supports -- will she seek to get support for that? >> we support expelling libya from the human rights council. there were announcements made yesterday by the arab league and the african lead. >> why hasn't the situation in libya cause the call for the ouster of khaddafi? -- gaddafi? >> what happens in libya is up to the libyan people. there must be a government that is responsive to their aspirations.

if the government continues to suppress instance, they will be accountable. >> [inaudible] >> that is correct. you have the people of libya wanting a say in the future of their country and their government. we support that. the decision as to who will leave libya in the future is a matter for the people. >> you talked about the situation in [inaudible] one of the issues is about chemical weapons and what gadhafi has in the possession and what he could use on his people. what are the international partners doing to make sure he does not reign what he may or may not have down on his people?

>> we have eliminated or destroyed the most dangerous wmdents of libya's former program. there are materials that remain in libya today, but they are not in weaponized form. we are closely monitoring the situation. >> are you sure he has not acquired the means? are you sure he has not suspiciously acquired the ability to weaponized these things. ? >> it is an area we continue to monitor. i am not in a position to give you a 100% guarantee. we have no information at this

point to suggest he is following that course. >> can i follow on the human rights council? why is the secretary going to geneva rather than the security council? thattrikes me as odd something this serious would not be elevated to the level of her going to new york. but those are not mutually exclusive. one of the reasons she is going to geneva is to address the human rights council. it will provide an opportunity with a number -- a number of her counterpart in geneva with a number of consultations that are needed so we can have effective action going forward in the multilateral settings as well as decisions that we will make as a government here. she will have the opportunity to try to build the kind of consensus for action that you saw in the u.n. security council

statement up a couple of days ago. i would suspect that there are ongoing discussions about future actions. the secretary will consult with european ministers. >> which one of the future actions be freezing gaddafi's assets? are you pushing in that , when?on and if so ,wh >> these are actions we will take and coordinate with partners. we are looking at actions we might to do here unilaterally as well as consulting broadly. the president was making some calls today. the secretary was hoping to make some calls today. we have a broad based engagement.

we will look to take action within our laws and within a variety of multilateral forums including the u.n., including the human rights council. >> i am glad you brought up the president's statement. i was going to ask you about it. when we hear that the president has asked the administration to prepare the full range of options we have to respond to crisis, a couple of questions are rise. first, given that this crisis has been evident since february 14, why did it take the president until february 23 to prepare that range of options? >> we have a lot of tools at our disposal as i talked about yesterday. we have been assessing the situation to have clarity about

what is happening. we have been consulting with other countries. we did have strong -- a strong statement out of the u.n. a couple of days ago. there are actions that are being queued up within our government. if you think about the kinds of sanctions we imposed on foreign governments in the past when they do not live up to their obligations or violate the human rights of their people, we are looking at a range of options, killing up a list of options for the president. we expect to take action in a couple of days. it takes time to make sure that whatever actions we take, we believe they are most likely to be successful in putting pressure on the libyan government to respect the rights and actions of their people. >> when the president tells us he has asked the ministration to

prepare the full range of options, would it be proper to assume that full range would include military options? >> we have had meetings constantly on this since last week when the events began to unfold in libya. the military has been a full participant in these discussions. we are consulting broadly about steps we can take. there are decisions that have yet to be made. there is a lot of action going on across the government. we have a wide range of tools, financial, sanctions, multilateral actions. we are considering all of them. the military is fully involved in these discussions and doing its own thinking about options that can be presented to the president. >> one last question.

one of the first determination's u.s. policymakers have to make in their dealings with foreign heads of state is whether they believe in giving -- whether the foreign head of state is a rational actor. does the administration believe gaddafi is a rational actor? >> we have been in touch with a range of governments that have had direct conversations with him. we have not. we have had come stations with others in his government, specifically the foreign minister. they have provided their perspective on what they believe is happening in their country. we have offered our belief that

the violence has to end. we will continue to have those compositions with libyan officials. it is not for us to determine if they are seeing the situation properly or not. as the president and the secretary said, we demand that be violence cease. we remain concerned about what we see. we remain concerned about the combination of military forces and mercenaries out on the streets of libya. you can see a fracturing of libyan society. we are concerned about the potential for continued violence and the implication on the people of libya. we will judge libya by the actions that it takes. we have made sure -- we have

clearly stated that the libyan government will be held accountable for the actions it has already taken and will take in the days going forward. >> what is the status of the u.s. ambassador to libya? how has his absence injured what the u.s. is able to do in libya? >> the ambassador is not in libya. you are right. we have complete confidence in the charge. she and her team are doing a brilliant job under arduous conditions. they are looking after the welfare of u.s. citizens and continuing the ongoing dialogue with the libyan government. i do not think there is any impact in terms of the absence

of the ambassador. he is one of our more distinguished the veterans. >> how have his actions helped you deal with the libyans? in other words, do you think the ambassador would have been invited to this meeting with the horn minister atcharge -- and the charge? >> the charge is our senior diplomat. she has believe every day with the libyan government. >> there are reasons the ambassador is here and not in libya. it has nothing to do with this. there was access to libya that might have been curtailed.

on the meeting yesterday, your impression was that it was called specifically for them -- when they talked about treating them as al qaeda collaborators, did they go beyond that? >> i have given you all the information i have in the perspective i have on the meeting. >> did the u.s. contest the notion that john a list -- contest the notion that journalists going in our clabber there -- collaborators with al qaeda ? a? >> do you have a picture of the chain of command in libya? what is the chain of command in

libya? >> if he is not the leader of libya, that would be news to the rest of the world. it is not for me to parse his works. we have had many conversations with his government making clear what we strongly believe the libyan government should do and should not do. as to what he says and what he does, we will evaluate what happens going forward based on the actions of libyan authorities. we will stress that the violence needs to cease. >> how the accord may people who are leaving? >> there are people who have control of security forces within the government. they have been responsive to the

requests we have made. >> that me go back to the contact with the coffee -- cannot think -- with gaddafi. have you pursued a conversation with h.a.m.p.? >> we have not pursued a compensation with hem. im. they have passed messages to us from the gad mr.dafi. -- mr. gaddafi. the undersecretary have to accommodations with the foreign minister. the assistant secretary had a number of conversations with him. my understanding is that the secretary was trying to tee up a

call, but there was a technical problem. to talkaven't you try to colonel gaddafi. >> i am not aware that we have any plans to talk to him. >> but why? he is the man in charge. but it we have any such conversations, we will let you know. these are diplomatic exchanges. we will leave them private. we have had a couple of instances where people have passed on what they have purported to be direct correspondence or messages from mr. gaddafi.

>> what a lot of us are seeing is cell phone video of bodies in various parts of the country. at what point does rhetoric becomes action or the country? and for the countries who have citizens in their? >> we are taking action. we are in broad consultation with other governments as well. we do not have the kind of relationship or the kind of economic relationship that other countries have. if the intent is to find ways to put pressure on mr.gaddafi, his family and others who are responsible for the human rights

violations, the suppression of the libyan people that we have seen, then we need to work as a national community, including actions with those -- the idea here is that collectively we can put a concerted international pressure on libya. we are reviewing those options right now. the president has instructed the government to come up with a range of options. that is being done actively as we speak. we are in the process of making decisions, taking actions. we will detail those to you as we can. we are responding to what we have seen on the ground in the last few days with the direct intent of making clear to libya that this has to start.

but what more do you need to see before you start cutting off his assets and doing other things that members of congress are calling for? >> as we have said clearly yesterday from this podium, from the secretary, we have all of these options available to us. we are pursuing these options. we are assessing what kinds of things we can do that will have the kind of impact that we seek to put real pressure and demonstrate to libya that there will be consequences for the action we have taken. in many cases, we can take action as a government. we are putting those steps, those actions in place. there needs to be collective

action. there are sanctions we can do unilaterally and sanctions we can do multilaterally. other countries have more fully developed economic relationships with libya. as we reach a point where we can detail to you the actions we have taken, we will let you know. there is action under way. -- underway. >> do you expect that decisions will be made on monday when the secretary goes to geneva? >> i expect decisions will be made soon. when the president makes those decisions, we will let you know. >> how big is the number of u.s.

citizens in there? >> we are doing everything we can to get the american citizens out of harm's way. we are actively pursuing a range of steps that are available to us and that the president outlined yesterday. there is action being taken. there are complications being made. there are options being teed up for the president and the citizens. as decisions are made, we will let you know. >> i understand it is up to the libyan citizens to decide who they want to rule their country. president obama did come out and say the people of egypt have spoken and the transition needs to start now. why aren't you saying that about libya? the libyan people do not want to continue to be ruled by muammar

gaddafi. why don't you save the people of libya have spoken and it is time for a transition to start in libya? the language is cautious. why are you afraid of? -- what are you afraid of? are you worried about a hostage situation in libya, a human shield? >> we are carefully evaluating the situation in libya. it is unpredictable and on stable. -- and unstabel. le. unlike egypt where the government maintained control of the country throughout its protests, here you have a situation where the central government has lost control of

portions of its country. i do not know -- there is no single approach. we are looking at a unique set of circumstances in libya. we are carefully evaluating the steps we can take. whatever steps we do take, we want them to be effective. we do not want to take any actions that put our assistance or the citizens of other countries at risk. we are dealing with a unique set of circumstances in eurlibya, mh different than what we saw in tunisia, egypt, or bahrain. we have a number of options available to us. we will be making decisions in the coming days. options will be presented to the president and the principals in the coming days. we are taking action.

we are concerned about what is happening. -- about what is happening. we remain concerned that this situation could turn even more violence than it already has. our objective here is to protect people in libya, protect our own citizens and those of other countries, and to have the kind of effect we want to have on the thinking of the libyan government. that is what we are actively doing. >> the british were able to get a royal air force plane in there and take people out. you talked about whether -- about the weather. but why with the bridges be able to do that? >> we tartaric -- we chartered a ferry which would have had the

capacity of three aircraft. we were unable to secure permission to land earlier this week. we would have had an aircraft on the ground today had it not been for the weather. wilson look been --i was look -- i will salute the raf pilots who were able to land aircraft. >> did you think about asking the british to help take out some americans on that plane? >> we have had multiple conversations with a wide range of government. everyone is trying to do the same thing.

there are 5000 people currently at the tripoli airport. that is a much larger number for a relatively small airport. we are using every means possible to get our citizens out. in the case of the ferry, where we have had the opportunity to support other countries, we have done so. we trust that as other governments are able to help our assistance in other parts of the country, we have pledges they will do their best to support us on a space available basis. everyone is in the same boat and everyone has pledged to cooperate fully. we were gratified to help get citizens of other countries out of tripoli. we expect that across the country, others will be helping our citizens as well. >> the british government has

been criticized on not acting quickly enough in getting its citizen oil workers out quickly enough. are there americans in some of these remote areas? >> there were at the start of this. i cannot give you the disposition at the present time. we have been in touch with companies that have employees there. in many cases, they are working through us. in many cases, they are working on their on. >> can i ask a general question? >> we can do rock, paper, scissors if need be. >> on the general process we have been observing over the last few weeks, you say you are working on this on a case by case basis.

there is a general process ongoing which is changing the face of the middle east in a precise and fundamental way. it concerns the major financial breakdown prices creating conditions unlivability in this area of the world. the fact that they are on the street is not because their rent prices are going up. this is the basic driving force in the region, which is forcing people to make moves they have not been forced to make previously. the united states has a responsibility and has had a responsibility generally for taking the initiative and creating economic conditions in which people are not in. do we have anyone in the state department looking at this in terms of the overall situation in order to adopt a policy to meet those changing conditions?

economic conditions do not change -- >> it is a long speech. what is the "this" you are asking about? >> in this building, people are looking at this saying, we are going to have to have a policy so that this region -- >> of course, we are looking at the immediate challenge this country by country by country. we are looking at the broad implications of the enormous change that is happening across the region. absolutely. >> would be united states like to see libya commence an orderly transition to democracy now? >> that is not for us to say.

>> you do not want to see an orderly transition to democracy? >> you don't say that. you are saying something else. we are working significantly on the challenge that libya represent here. we are reviewing a range of options. there is something that we want in the short term. there is something the international community wants in the long term. we watch the violence to stop. we want the bloodshed to stop. we want the rights of the libyan people to be protected. we're doing everything in our power with the libyan government to stabilize the situation on the ground. there are long-term implications based on what is happening here. we will join in what we expect to be a strong condemnation of

the libyan government tomorrow at the human rights council. they have crossed a line and significantly violate it is human rights of their people. significantlyrt -- v it inio violated the human rights of their people. libya must respect its people and respond to their aspirations and it must reform. how we do that given the extremely complex situation that does present itself in libya that is different than any other thing that has happened in recent weeks and in any other country in the region, we are working carefully to assess the situation, review the options we have, and understand what we expect a response to be inside libya, not only by the

government, but the other actors that have emerged across the country. we are being careful. this is a complex and ball tell situation. -- complex and volatile situation. >> on the foreign nationals, you have any information on what countries they are from. >> i don't know. >> what is it you might be taking to the security council on libya? >> i do expect there will be a follow-up in meetings and follow action within the security council. we are following up with other governments on what steps might be taken. i will not prejudge.

>> yesterday, the president said that bill burns would be going to other places besides egypt. i understand he is going to algeria. and he is going to europe after that? >> he is going to europe. today, he talked to the foreign minister and he had a meeting with the algerian leadership. he will be going to rome tonight for consultations with iitaly. beyond that, i do not know. he will have other stops. >> you said this morning there is a date for the trial in cuba. wind is its? >> march 4. -- when it it?

>> march 4. >> [unintelligible] >> there are protests going on in virtually every country in the region. we are in touch with saudi arabia. the king returned to saudi arabia yesterday. i do not have a particular comment about what is going on today in eastern saudi arabia. >> japan and russia seems to be involved in the u.s. there are protests outside the embassy in moscow. the you know about this? >> i do know about that.

we have stated our position on the islands. i can recite it for you again if you wish. >> [inaudible] concerns about north korean uranium. >> we have expressed our own concerns about the north korean uranium enrichment program. >> can you tell us with whom [inaudible] has been meeting with abnd when? >> i believe he is meeting with the ambassador and the special adviser. i believe he will meet tomorrow with the assistant secretary. >> on the general idea of uranium, the have any

information that iran is seeking to get uranium from zimbabwe and other places? >> i can take that question. that has been a longstanding concern of ours. seeking sources of the uranium in africa. >> the problem in argentina seems not to be solved. the prime minister says u.s. -- the u.s. has not given enough of an explanation. is the u.s. going to give more of an explanation? simply do not understand why this issue has not been