after all the intelligence has been analyzed, and there is a clearer picture of who knew what and when, and and see if pakistan and the united states can get together and the baseline the relationship and go into what is an absolutely strategically important relationship that will not only effect and how pakistan, but also provide for a

that is very much the downside for the future stability for the region. and if we will embark on a new set of completely different parameters that we're working on them. let's hope that as the senator pointed out, the upside can carry things today. logic would indicate that it should. i think we should continue to try to understand pakistani sensitivities and perspectives.

and if we need to come to some agreement about what happened or did not happen 10 or 20 years ago. let's get beyond this. we're worried about today and what will happen tomorrow. that is what is important. >> how much were you involved in the discussions about an intelligence situation in of all about -- abbottabad? >> nothing. i can point out that this was a long process. it started many years ago, it was the first real breakthrough coming last year, and we made the decision and the president made the decision to exploit and develop this potential target which turned out to be the last of the dry holes, and this was

not a dry hole. this was where he was. but the effort that went into it is truly amazing. and as i touched upon, i think that one of the unintended consequences of bin laden's reign of terror, if i could use those words, are the degree to which intelligence and operational forces not only in our country but in many other countries that we work with every day have now come together to create a situation where we are at least aware of where these movements are going. before, we were chasing yet, we would react to them. we have been quite successful in being proactive not only in causing huge damage to the leadership structure of al qaeda, but also anticipating and having a pretty good idea of

where they are operating on the planet and what their intent is. >> what you think about the use of that interrogation techniques have reportedly led to the discovery of bin laden's hideout and should they be banned? >> if this is a predictable consequence for both sides of the argument. my personal view is that i did not support the idea that the united states should be viewed as a nation that condones torture. to one nowe debate as to what exactly was extracted and he knew what when, and i will not be involved in that, but i do think that the president's the decision in 2009 was correct.

and i think that this debate will continue and we will see where it goes, and i think it will get to the definition of what really is torture and what is not. or to be said about that as the dialogue insults. >> what your thoughts about the u.s. special forces that carried out the mission to kill bin laden? >> i think we are all in great admiration for all of our men and women in uniform wherever they are, wherever they serve. they're wonderful examples of our society. they are all volunteers and some of them going to special forces. each service has them. they are truly great patriots and heroic people that would not

hesitate to make the ultimate sacrifice for the values and causes we believe in, even for other countries. i do not have the vocabulary to adequately express my admiration. i have been privileged to work with them for 40 years in uniform. i admire what they do. i think in this particular case, it goes to show just how good they really are and something we can be very thankful for. >> i asked you earlier about before we came down here today, the relevance of a fairly the operational involvement of bin laden that we now know in retrospect. can you talk about how that perhaps informed us about what has been going on and what it means about the potential for attacks in the future? >> well, i think that while the degree to which, at least initially if i read the report

correctly, the degree to which he was involved may have been a surprise, but i did not think it is indicative necessarily that there is a major threat as a result of his involvement. he was always going to be the symbolic leader. we just had this image of him living in a cave and coming out at time to release a video of the documentary are making some statement. -- for making some statements. we do know that bin laden last year was personally involved in planning some so-called major attack on the european land mass. as an example of our collaboration with our european friends and allies, we worked very hard and very long to make sure that we shared whatever intelligence we have with them and they with us, and in the course of trying to prevent that

attack, we were able to come each country, -- we were able to, each country, to clean up some bad actors in each country for reasons that i do not know, and that attack never came off. and i believe the fact that bin laden is no longer able to lead, he will inspire but he will not be personally planning things -- the fact is that we are probably all safer in terms of a grandiose event ala 9/11. there will probably the some repercussions at the tactical level, but there is no question, i think, that because of the way in which our intelligence

organizations work and are operational force is bland and our willingness to transfer information very rapidly in order to afford these kinds of attacks, it is quite possible that this will be the defining moment in the war against terror. and i hope that it is. >> and you said earlier and now was like to have you elaborate on the remarkable extent now that you see, the collaboration among nations on gathering intelligence. you said it would not have occurred had not been for of 9/11. can you elaborate? >> yes, i think it was obvious that al qaeda and caused us to really reevaluate not only our the harmonycess thes that existed in the intelligence

community, and how you bring intelligence to the operators and how you do that and a relatively secure mode so that you do not jeopardize the sources for the operation itself, really had a transformational if that, the benefits of which we are reading today. what goes on today 24/7 on around the clock in this capital and others is astounding. it speaks well, i think, to the passion to defend this country and others, in the raid in which we can convert useful technology into helping us win this battle has been great. the international community has come together to make all our borders safer, something i am sure bin laden never thought

about. but it is a consequence. it is a reality. we should be thankful because this will apply not just against al qaeda but against all terrorist organizations that might have similar designs. >> in that it is the 10th anniversary of 9/11 coming up, is there a danger that government and people come -- become complacent and we have not had such a serious attack since then? >> you know, i would -- we have had a tense. none of -- attempts. none of them have been successful. the vehicle in times where they did not detonate -- times square that did not detonate. we concluded that that was a successful attack.

it was just that at the moment of explosion, the connecticut ability of the bomb did not work. and so many lives were probably spare. that caused us to really go back and work even harder to try to find out what we could do better to make sure that no attack gets that far. as the anniversary comes up, i think vigilance -- i can assure you that vigilance will be extremely high. and we should take nothing for granted. we're still not out of this. and while we can take and rejoiced the immediate outcome of the last two weeks, the threat is still there. it is still real. but thank god we have dedicated people who will not build into being complacent -- lulled into

being complacent. i can assure you there is no chance that anybody will take this off on that subject. >> the question is being asked, does this change in our commitment in afghanistan now that bin laden is gone crosier mark and the secretary gates has essentially said it is to early to -- too early to ask that question. what pace of withdrawal would you recommend? >> we do -- we do want to finish around 5:00, right? [laughter] i do actually think that we have since the nato summit in portugal in december, probably as cohesive as a game plan in terms of the international community -- and we always have

to remember that we are not the only ones in this. we are the biggest player by far but we are not the only ones who are paying a price for this involvement in afghanistan. other countries are as well and we should be grateful for their sacrifice and their efforts. in december of last year, at the lisbon summit, the nato summit, that countries agreed that we would honor president karzai's request that he be in full control of this country, security, economic, and governance, by 2014. the road to 2014 begins this year. i did not know what the recommendation will be in terms of how much -- how many of our troops will leave or how many of our allies will lead. i did not know a lot of the details except for the concept

that makes sense. at some point, afghans after all these years are going to have to step up to the task of the decision has been made, we're all sitting to making president karzai's request to reality. we will see how that plays out. there are certain things we like to see happen. they like to see governance and rule of law become more paramount in that country. we would like to see corruption decreased. we would like to see some economic renewal. we would like to encourage the international community, the business community to invest in

afghanistan. but this will be a relatively short period of time between now and 2014 when all of these things will have to be put into place. one thing that is positive is the transference to iraqi control of each province, one at a time, as the province shows itself ready to take over security, economic, and governance responsibilities. it is an exciting program. it is pretty straightforward. you can see it on a simple map. i am told that that effort is underway and the progress we're making is encouraging, just as the security investment that we made over couple of years ago is now paying good dividends as well. >> what guarantee is there that when the u.s. forces withdraw from afghanistan, the power vacuum will not be filled by radical elements? >> unfortunately there is no guarantee.

and just as there is no guarantee that iraq, when we pull out, will not chart its own path that might not be in total harmony with what we had in mind. we hope that that is not the case. but we want to make sure that the linkages between these efforts go away, we will like to see them, to provide a better way of life in more opportunity for the people of iraq and afghanistan is to really take off holistic approach to not just security, but also economic and development and also to the extent that we can influencing the government and the rule of law reforms that the people of iraq and the people of afghanistan clearly want and deserve. and so it is not just about the

security aspect of things. you have to have security to establish a certain level of capabilities elsewhere in the society, but we should never take our eye off of the fact that more needs to be done then just defeating saddam hussein or defeating the taliban or al qaeda. we learned that lesson in world war ii with germany and japan. everywhere we have taken a more holistic approach to problem- solving, we have done well. i just got back from south korea not long ago, and what a great success story south korea is, one that all caribbean war veteran should take great pride in. -- korean war veterans should take great pride in. let's hope that we can be successful but also remembered that we cannot win this any more

than the rigid want this anymore than the people themselves wanted in the long term. >> cat is a great transition to president obama speech that will do with all of these questions. we have a couple of questions here -- what you hope he can accomplish and what would you advise him to include in that speech? >> i thought i had given this job. [laughter] well, on the issue of national security, it is clear that national-security has a much broader portfolio than ever before. it includes cybersecurity, economic issues, things like climate and energy in particular. i think that if i were to make any kind of contribution in the future, it would be toward

tackling not only our deficit and our economic situation, but critically our energy portfolio and how it is managed for the future. this is a truly 21st century problem that we are facing. it requires leadership at the highest levels. i have used the analogy that president eisenhower, when he had a vision for the highway system, really had a lot of opposition to the idea of building highways to nowhere in our country. and are we not glad that he prevailed? he does this fantastic road system that we have today. i like in the energy problem to the highway problem of years ago. we need in energy highway that takes us to our destination, and that destination includes

harnessing the technologies available, analyzing the portfolio, making whatever organizational and structural reforms that we need in our executive branch and legislative branch, to create a really bipartisan approach to what i think is one of the most serious challenges that we face. the good news is that it is doable. it really is doable. americans know how to do this. the american people want this. it is not a question of reacting when the price per gallon of gas is $4 or $5 and forgetting about the going below $3. this is a steady state problem that will affect us, it will affect the next generation in the generation after that, it affects our balance of payments, it affects just about everything i can think of. in addition to the president's many, many problems, i would

hope that the administration can find the conviction and the time to turn to this particular critical problem. because it is not only important domestically, it is an important component of how u.s. will lead in the 21st century and the role we will play on the global playing field on what is not only a national security issue, but an international security issue as well. frankly, if you look at the emergence -- the growing disparity between the haves and have not nations, one way that you can bridge that is for the advanced societies to help the societies and governments getting to that. back where they have to choose between fossil fuels and not much else, we can help them jump that generation so that they do not damage the climate and to get to cleaner, more affordable energy sources in the future.

a greater variety of energy sources. the united states can lead in an effort and while we cannot do it by ourselves, we can significantly affect the global playing field with regard to energy in the 21st century, which is as simple and as anything else that i think the president will have to take on in his remaining years in office. >> among the areas that one might hope there be bipartisan agreement is funding the government up operations with the budgetary pressures that they are facing. it seems as if defense spending may have to be reduced. where do you see, perhaps, the most rational solutions there? >> i think secretary gates has just been superb in anticipating this reality. as early as two years ago.

he started talking about the need to find economies of scale within the defense department and set about to do that. i think what we're really talking about here is a reevaluation of the roles and missions in the sense that the likelihood of a major. -rival level, 20th-century conflict are removed. but the likelihood of being able -- being asked to pay more to help shape the environment in different parts of the world probably pretty high. but it will take a different organizational construct in terms of the types of force is being used, and they will have to be used and the whole of government approach depending on what it is we're trying to change or effect. i think we have left the 20th-

century, which is in terms of warfare a reactive type of century. nato was a reactive organization. i do not think we have the luxury of reacting and waiting along time to react to things we know are going to happen. if you know it is going happen, perhaps you can effect the outcome by engaging earlier and with the right prescription for the amount of aid, the right amount of training, the right amount of economic incentives, in a much closer relationship between the public and private sector. i think that is when help was a great deal. and it will continue to reinforce the destiny that all americans want common -- and that all americans want, we want to be a nation that is respected and admired and influential in the globe. the will be a different century.

therefore our response to different challenges is going to have to be different. we're going have to organize ourselves to be more rapid, to be more agile, and it doesn't necessarily mean that we will be doing things the way we did them in the 20th century. and now will fly to the defense department. -- and that will apply to the defense secretary gates and the joint chiefs fully understand that. they did some of their better thinking. they do not tend to think too much of the money trough completely on open all the time. you take it and use it. but when it tightens a little bit, that is when you really start thinking, what do we really need here, what is it we are trying to do, how do we organize ourselves, and how do we get through this period in a useful way?

i think what secretary gates has achieved and the president has supported is to start that process so that it is a success. >> i ask you to be sustained in the next question because we're almost running out of time. how you think we're doing with libya right now? >> i think that is an open question. we all understand how we got in there. the president made the decision to forestall a humanitarian catastrophe. and largely succeeded in doing that. but putting your foot into libya translated into united nations and nato reacting relatively quickly who are usually criticized for being too little, too late, and too slow. now it is a net zero operations,

with a limited mandate -- a nato operation, with a limited mandate to protect the population. i think it is still too early to tell, but it looks like that out the outgaddafi has the wherewithal to ride this out for a little bit longer. but unfortunately, the judgment will being in the not too distant future, if gaddafi still remains at the helm of his country, that despite the mandate did not ask for any kind of support for an overthrow, that the support to assess the protection of innocent people will be judged against whether gaddafi stays in office. that is just reality. it may not be fair, but it is too early yet to see how this is going to play out. >> we're almost out of time. before we ask a last question, a

couple of housekeeping matters to take care of. like to remind you about upcoming speakers. richard trumka, president of the afl-cio, will be our guest. juan williams, policies and your reader, will appear to reply to a speech clear in the year when the with-a speech from a then- president of npr. the formation of the gary sinese foundation, supporting the military. i would also like to remind you that on june 11, the national press club hosts its 14th annual beat the5k raise with honorary spokesman. secondly, allowed to go to the tradition here of presenting our guest for the highly coveted npc mug, and it is not as handy a

weapon as the state knife which we would be happy to present to you as well, but here. [applause] by less questions about movies. what is your favorite film about war? [laughter] >> i have two. the first is from "from here to eternity." and the second is open but the sensibility mount." -- "sand of iwo jima." when he was lecturing his marines any said something that i have you since i have heard it. like this tough, but it is tougher if you are stupid. [laughter]

>> how about our round of applause for our speaker today? [applause] thank you to all of you for coming and also to general jones. i like to thank the national press club staff including our library broadcast center for helping to organize today's event. finally reminder that you can find more information about the press club on our website, and if you would like a copy of today's program, if you could check it out at www.press.org. thank you and we are adjourn. [gavel hammering] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011]

[unintelligible] [unintelligible]

[unintelligible] [unintelligible]

>> james jones testifies tomorrow morning with a senate foreign relations committee on u.s. relations with pakistan. that is on our companion network,3,, and 9:30 a.m. eastern. also interior secretary ken salazar and that allen about legislation regarding drilling for offshore oil and gas. you can see that on c-span at 10:00 a.m. eastern. in a few moments, former white house chief of staff rahm

emanuel is sworn in as the mayor of chicago. in half an hour, at today's launch of the space shuttle endeavor. after that, paul ryan on the economy, the budget, and the debt. and later, discussion of the role of cia interrogations' in the success of the mission that killed osama bin laden. this weekend on both tv on c- span2 a book festival. the largest labor vault, india, and the middle east come and the former ambassador to yemen on the u.s. counter-terrorism efforts in that country. and on afterwards, on the berlin wall. look for the complete schedule at our website and get our schedules e-mail directly to you. signup for our alert. rahm emanuel was sworn in as the

mayor of chicago today. in his inaugural address he talks about his plans to create jobs and improve chicago schools. this is half an hour. >> he will now administer the oath of august 3 -- both of office to rahm emanuel was the mayor of chicago. >> repay it after me. i rahm emanuel do solemnly swear that i will support the constitution of the united states and the constitution of the state of illinois and that i will faithfully discharge the duties of the office of mayor of the city of chicago according to

the best of my ability. >> congratulations. >> thank you.

>> honored guest, mr. vice president, dr. biden, mayor daley, maggie daley, members of the city council and other elected officials, residents and friends of chicago -- today more than any other time in our history, more than any other place in our country, the city of chicago is ready for change. [applause] for all the parents who deserve a school system that expects

every student to earn a diploma, for all the neighbors who deserve to walk home on safer streets, for all the taxpayers who deserve a city government that is more effective and costs less, and for all the people in the hardest-working city in america who deserve a strong economy so that they can find jobs or create jobs -- this is your day. [applause] as your new mayor, it is an honor to fight for the change we need and a privilege to lead the city we love. we have much to do, but we should first acknowledge how far we have come. a generation ago, people writing chicago off as a dying city very they said our downtown was failing, our neighborhoods were unlivable, our schools were the

worst in the nation, and our politics had become so divisive we were referred to as beirut on the lake. when richard daley took office as mayor 22 years ago, he challenged all of us to lower our voices and raise our sights. chicago is a different city today than the one mayor daley inherited, thanks to all he did. [applause] this is a magnificent place where we gather today. it is a living symbol of that transformation. back then, this was an abandoned

rail yard. a generation later, what was -- what was once a nagging urban eyesore is now a world-class urban park. there mayor daley's vision, determination, his leadership, this place like our city was reborn. we are now much greater city because of a lifetime of service that mayor daley and first lady maggie daley have given us. [applause] nobody ever loved chicago more or served it better than richard daley. now, mr. mayor, and forevermore, chicago loves you back. [applause] i have big shoes to fill.

and i could not have taken on this challenge without amy, my first love and our new first lady. [applause] and our children, zack, ilana, and leah. and i want to thank my parents, who gave me the opportunity to get a good education and whose values have guided me through life. i also want to thank president obama, who turned our nation around and who loves chicago so much, he understood why i wanted to come home to get our city moving again. new times demand new answers. old problems cry out for better results. this morning we leave behind the old ways and old divisions and begin a new day for chicago.

i am proud to lead a city united in common purpose and driven by a, is that -- a common thirst for change. to do that, we must face the truth. it is time to take on the challenges that threaten the very future of our city. the quality of our schools, the safety of our streets, the cost and effectiveness of city government, and the urgent need to create jobs of the future right here in the city of chicago. the decisions we make in the next two or three years will determine what chicago will look like in the next 20 or 30. in shaping that future, our children and their schools must come first. [applause] there are some great success stories in our schools -- wonderful, imaginative teachers

and administrators, who pour their hearts into their mission and inspire students to learn and succeed. i honor those educators. i want to lift them up, support them, and make them the standard for the chicago public school system. let us also recognize the magnitude of the challenge and the distance we must go before we can declare that the chicago public schools are what they should be. today our school system only graduates half of our kids. and with one of the shortest school days and school years in the country, we even shortchange those who earn a diploma. by high school graduation, a student in houston has been in the classroom an equivalent of three years longer than a student in chicago even when they both started kindergarten on the very same day. our legislature in springfield has taken an historic first

debt, and i personally want to thank senate president cullerton, a sister majority leader reid lightford, speaker madigan, majority leader currie, representative lavia, and those from both parties took a courageous and critical vote. finally chicago will have the tools we need to give our children the schools they deserve. a longer school day and year on par with other major cities. and reformed tenure to help us keep good teachers and pay them better. each child has a chance, one chance at a good education. every single one of them deserves the very best we can provide. and i am encouraged that the governor will act soon to make these reforms a reality for our children. [applause]

to lead our efforts in chicago, we have a courageous new schools ceo, and a strong and highly qualified new school board with zero tolerance for the status quo and a proven track record to back it up. as some have noted, including amy, i am not a patient man. [laughter] and when it comes to improving our school, i will not be a patient mayor. my responsibility -- [applause] my responsibility is to provide our children with highly qualified and motivated teachers and i will work day and night to meet that obligation. let us be honest -- for teachers to succeed, they must have parents as partners. to give our children the education they deserve, parents must get off the sidelines and

involved with their child's education. the most important door for a child's education is the front door of that home. and nothing i do with the schools can ever replace that. working together, though, we can create a seamless partnership from the classroom to the family room, to help our children learn and succeed. we will do our part. parents, we need you to do yours. [applause] second, we must make our streets safer. chicago has always had the build of a big city with the heart of a small town. but that heart is being broken as our children's continue to be victims of violence. some in their homes, some on their porches, some on their way to and from school. during the campaign, i visited a memorial in roseland, one that lists the names of children who

have been killed by gun violence. this memorial is only a few years old. but what 220 names, it has already run out of space. there are 150 more names yet to be added. i want you to think about that. think about what that means. mostials are society's powerful tribute to its highest values and ideals -- courage, patriotism, sacrifice. what kind of society have we become when we find ourselves paying tribute not only to soldiers and police officers but to children who were just playing on the block? what kind of society have we become when the memorials we build on our the loss of innocence and a loss of

childhood chris to mark the memorial does more than mourn the dead. it shames the living. it should prod all of us, every adult, to step in, stand up, and speak out. [applause] we cannot look away and we cannot become numb to it a. kids belong in our schools. on our playgrounds, in our parks. not frozen in time on the side of a grim memorial. our new police chief understands that. as the beat officer who worked his way through the ranks, and as the leader of of our baidu dramatically reduced violent crime, he is the right man at the right time for the right job. but here too, like with our schools, partnership is key. the police cannot do it alone.

it is an often -- it is not enough to bemoan violence in our neighborhoods. those who have knowledge and information that can help solve and prevent crimes have to come forward and help. together we can make all of our streets in a brick neighborhood safer. -- in every neighborhood center. third, we must put the city of chicago's financial house in order, because we cannot do any of these things if we squander the resources they require. from the moment i began my campaign for mayor, have been clear about the hard truths and tough choices we face. we simply cannot afford the size of city government that we had in the past. taxpayers deserve a more effective and efficient government than the one we have today. our city's financial situation is difficult and profound. we cannot ignore these problems a longer period it is not just a matter of doing more with less. we must look at every aspect of

city government and ask some basic questions. can we afford it? is it worth it? do we needed? is there a better deal? while we are not the first city government to face these questions, it is my fervent hope that we become the first to solve them. the old ways no longer work. it is time for a new era of responsibility and reform. i reject how leaders in wisconsin and ohio are exploiting their financial crisis to achieve a political goal. [applause] that is not the right course for chicago's future. however, doing everything the same way we always have is not the right course for chicago's future either. we will do no favors to our city employees and our taxpayers if we let outdated rules and outmoded practices make important government services too costly to deliver.

i fully understand that there will be those who oppose my efforts to reform our schools, to cut costs, and to make government more effective. some are sure to say, "these is the way we do things, we cannot try something new." "those of the rules, we cannot change them." that is a prescription for failure that chicago will not accept. [applause] given the challenges that we face, we need to look for better ways and smarter ways to meet our responsibilities. selwyn ask for new policies, i guarantee the one answer i will not tolerate is, of an " we have never done it that way before." chicago is the city of "yes, we can." from now on, when it comes to change, chicago will not take no for an answer. [applause] finally, we need to make chicago

to be the best place in america to start a business, create more job >> jobs, and gain the knowledge and skills to fill the jobs of tomorrow. chicago lost 2000 residents. no great city can thrive by shrinking. the best way to keep people from leaving is to attract the jobs that give them a good reason to stay. jobs will go to those cities that produce the workforce of tomorrow. so we must make sure that every student who graduates from our high schools has the foundation for a good career or the opportunity to go to college. we must pass the illinois dream act so that some children of undocumented immigrants have the chance to go to college. [applause] and we must make sure that our city colleges are graduating students that businesses want to hire. if chicago builds a skilled and knowledgeable workforce, the businesses and jobs of the future will beat a path to our

city. stronger schools, safer streets, and affordable and effective government, good- paying jobs -- these of the fund and look challenges confronting our city. if we can -- these are the fundamental challenges confronting our city. if we can get these things right, nothing can stop chicago. people come to see a city on the move. then we can only get them right by working together. i pledge to you today, that is exactly what we are going to do. city council members, new and old -- i reach out and hand of mutual respect and cooperation and i welcome your ideas for change. that also goes to businesses large and small and all our labor unions. it goes for organizations from every neighborhood in our charitable and academic institutions. all of us have our role in writing chicago's next chapter. and anyone open to change will have a seat at that table.

together we can renew and strengthen our city, community by community, business by business, neighborhood by neighborhood, and block by block. none of what we must overcome will be easy, but i know this in my heart -- the challenges for the city of chicago are no match for the character of the people of chicago. i believe in our city. i believe in our city because i know who we are and what we are made of -- the pride of every ethnic, religious, and economic background, and nearly 3 million strong. almost 140 years ago, a great fire devastated chicago. some thought we would never recover. an entire city had to be rebuilt from the ground up, and it was. that is how we earned the title of second city. as a 100 years later, portions

of our city burned once again. they were ignited by the murder of dr. and -- of dr. martin luther king and the injustices he fought to overcome. chicago still bears some of the scars from that time. and while there is still work to do, we have made substantial progress. look at the three of us who are being sworn in today. treasurer stephanie neely and clerk susanne ayman those of -- susana mendoza. both are superb some public servants who represent the best of our city. they are among a new generation of smart and capable civic leaders. at that is fair to say we are not our parent's chicago. an african-american whose family came from burnout, mississippi in a great migration north. a daughter of immigrants who came from mexico. a son of an israeli immigrant

from tel aviv and grandson of immigrants from eastern europe. our parents and our grandparents came not just to any a city. they came to america's city. they came to chicago. [applause] that three of us have achieved something our parents never imagined in their lifetimes. and while our three families traveled different paths, how they came to the same united city for a simple reason -- because this is the city where dreams are made. over the next four years, we have schools to fix. over the next four years, we have streets to make safe. over the next four years, we have a government to transform and businesses and jobs to attract. but above all, let's never forget the dream.

the dream that has made generation after generation of chicagoans come here and stay here. i am confident in chicago's future because i have seen it in the eyes of our schoolchildren and heard it in their voices. i saw it in the whitney young kids who took first place in our state's academic decathlon and third place in the division 1 national championship. that just won back to back championships and showed us what they're made of throughout the season. and the graduates from the urban prep academy, a high- school for a -- african american males. they are sending 100% of their graduates to a four-year college.

in the sophomores who reached first place in the spoken word contest. in a gunman imad who after a full day of school spent several hours a day at the ballet school. and the young man who led us in the pledge. he became interested in public service and got serious about his studies and is getting a's and b's in school. [applause] t in brian reed. shortly after i met him, i

learned he had been attacked at his bus stop by four young men who had been banned -- beaten and robbed him. he was beaten so badly, he was hospitalized. when i heard the news, i reached out to his principle. days later, his teacher gave me a note. in the letter, he wrote, i am doing fine and i am back in school. my attendance is good. i tried hard here. i wanted to tell you thanks for checking on me. despite the obstacles, our children just keep working and never stop dreaming. there is no doubt the children of chicago have what it takes to -- the question is, do away? will we do our part? let us roll our sleeves and take

on the hard work of securing chicago's future. our problem is large but so is our capacity to solve them. only if we are willing to bear the responsibility for keeping a strong. i ask each of you today those who lived here and those who work here, business and labour, let us share the sacrifices fairly and justly. everyone will give a little, no one will have to give too much. we will keep faith with those who build on the shores of lake michigan, a city where dreams are made. thank you and god bless you and god bless the city of chicago.

[applause] ♪ lostre are times we feel lis and no one cares ♪ ♪ time to launch of the space shuttle endeavour. in 10 minutes, more about the reaction to the shuttle launch gifford --

gabrielle gifford's staff. a discussion of the role of cia interrogations in the mission that killed osama bin laden. on "washington journal", an outline of the budget proposal. michael steele looks at the gop presidential field and we will discuss the work of the office of civil rights with sahar aziz. >> follow on twitter and joined the viewers to get advance notice of tomorrow's guests. the question of the day, high- profile bookings, and one of those who were killed.

it can add your comments to the conversation. do not miss any updates. start your twitter account today. >> the space shuttle endeavour is on its final mission, carrying a piece of equipment. monday's launch was attended by arizona congressman gabrielle giffords. >> no unexpected errors. >> copy that. minus two minutes and

counting. >> >> now arming the sound suppression water system.

>> one minute. >> closing a liquid oxygen and liquid hydrogen drain valves. now the handoff to the onboard computers. the hand of has occurred. -- handoff has occurred. >> 25. 20. >> firing chain is armed. the water system is armed. >> main engine start. 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1, 0 and

liftoff for the final launch of endeavor. expanding our knowledge, expanding our lives in space. >> roger, roll endeavour. >> it begins to roll oer on its back for a 56.3 degree and a one mile orbit. >> 3 engines throttling down as shuttle endeavor passes through the area of maximum dynamic pressure on the vehicle and the lower atmosphere.

approaching one minute into the flight. >> endeavour, go at throttle up. >> the three main engines back at full throttle. all three engines in good shape. endeavour is traveling 1,300 miles per hour. at an altitude of 11 miles. now 12 miles. at left off, and never fully fuelled -- endeavour fully fuelled, burning the fuel. next event is burning out and the twin solid rocket boosters coming up at 2 minutes 03 seconds. the boosters are earning 11,000 pounds of fuel per second.

>> standing by for separation of the solid rocket boosters. the onboard guidance system and has done its job of selling out in the dispersion -- selling out in the dispersion. it is traveling 3,000 miles per hour. all systems in good shape. three good hydraulic systems, with the fuel cells providing electrical power to the system. endeavour can reach a site in

the event of failure. space shuttle endeavour of sailing into fair winds. the or richer on the top as shuttle endeavor powers its way into orbit. traveling at 4,000 miles per hour. 90 miles altitude, 50 miles. three minutes, 15 seconds into the flight. >> all three main engines looking in good shape. hydraulic systems and electrical systems on board the orbiter.

>> shuttle endeavor, negative return. >> roger. >> shuttle endeavor can no longer return to the kennedy space center in the event of a failure. all three are in good shape as are the other systems. quiet as a flood of controllers and watches over the systems. formats, 20 seconds into the flight. it is traveling at 5,500 miles per hour. traveling at 335 feet in altitude. environmental and control systems officer reporting a good flash of operator systems, traveling into space on the forward flight deck is commander kelly and mike fink.

>> roger, press ato. >> endeavor can watch and all are performing as planned. headed to the international space station for the first time, making their first voyage on the space shuttle after flying to the international space station. >> single engine, ops three. >> the call indicates it could reach a transatlantic site at lost two of the three although all three are in good shape, 5

minutes 50 seconds into the flight. >> single engines, 104. >> several calls, they can reach a safe orbit on two systems. they are optimizing the air-to- ground communications. flight controller is reporting they are in good shape. >> shutdown plan as nominal. >> copy, shutdown plan is nominal.

>> central engine press 104. -- single engine press 1 04. >> the three engines are flowing fuel through their power systems equivalent to training a swimming pool in 25 seconds. seven minutes, 20 seconds into the flight. altitude, a 64 miles down range from the kennedy space center. 630 miles. traveling 13,500 miles per hour. now seeing throttling on the engines to maintain 3g gravity load on the crew.

engines at 82% of rated thrust. the main engine cutoff, commanded at 21 seconds. main engine cut off has been confirmed. flight dynamics reporting a nominal engine cutoff. and separation from the external tank.

the commander firing of the thruster jets to position the order for photography of the external. >> reacting to the lodge, rep gabrielle coheno giffords was overheard saying "good stuff". this is half an hour. >> welcome to this post launch briefing with u.s. representative gabrielle giffords' office. we have the chief of staff, and her press advisor mark kimble

and new media stragtegist. >> thanks to the public affairs team here. everyone at kennedy space center, we have been supportive. i want to thank everyone who played a role in that. thank you for sticking around. this will be quick and i will say a few words and answer some questions. we arrived yesterday around noon. we flew out of ellington field. we were on a flight with astronaut greg johnson's family. if you sign up for our .ccounts

we went to the beach house where the spouses and the crew were able to have lunch and spend some time there. we went to the gator [unintelligible] c-span.o that was it and the congress woman was able to see some staff who were there. :30s morning, we left at 630 and we went up to the roof. we saw a beautiful left off this

morning. we spent 15 minutes after liftoff with the rest of the spouses. we went back downstairs and i have been here since. it was a great day, obviously. we have been looking forward to this for many months. gabbie and us have been excited. it has been more challenging in with them as they made the decision he would fly and was nasa also that he was still keeping this mission. it was a big one for their families. a real sense of relief from all of us that this went off safely. and it is an exciting mission. that is the way of the land. there are plenty of questions.

we will go into other stuff, i am sure. >> please say your name and news affiliation. >> i wondered if the congress woman had any reaction, if she spoke during or after the launch happened. >> for all of us, we were sort of speechless. i cannot say there were a lot of words during the viewing. she did say to me, she woke up and said, good stuff. that was the thing i remember. it was not a lot of talking. we were cheering and clapping. >> can you describe what she was

doing and after, what her emotions were like? >> we were looking up in the sky and seeing some clouds at seven or 7:30 a.m., would this be scrubbed, what we have an issue here? before, we were excited. but a little worried. as the sun came up and the crowds burned off, we thought this would happen. she got excited that it looked like it was ago. -- a go. the report on flights, the spouses get to know one another

during this process. but after, relief was the biggest feeling. she was very proud and is always proud of mark and what he does. it was an exciting moment to watch. scott kelly delivered flowers and to their daughters. and then we went downstairs. >> what she holding anyone's hand? >> yes, hugs all around. her mom was with her watching when she was standing with her the whole time. >> could you tell us about the

schedule, how long will she stay in florida? guangxi here for the landing? >> we do not know whether or not she will come back to the landing. i believe it is sometime after 1:00 a.m.. it is not clear whether she would make that trip. it will be up to her in part whether she wants to make it and also the doctors. as far as her travel back, she will be leaving soon to go back today. surely in an hour or so. heading back to houston. >> the last time she arrived here when that launch was scrubbed, a nurse traveled with was a nurse or doctor with her?

she and her husband had exchanged rings. was she holding his ring during the launch, anything like that you can describe? >> we have two nurses with us. we have two because one sleeps and the other works. there are 12 hour shifts. that is for precaution. she does not need medical staff but she is under the care of the hospital as an inpatient so it is appropriate for to have medical staff with her. the second question about the ring, exchanged rings, they had brought to space. this time she wanted his back. his figures are bigger than hers. it does not fit so she is wearing it on a chain. i do not remember seeing her

clasping at. i do not think so. >> a question that crossed my mind. is she in a state of aphasia when she said that or she did not feel like talking? >> it was a combination. i am not getting into medical details of her recovery or challenges, but for all of us, it was not many words to describe. >> during the mission, there is often a time where you can have family crew conferences. are there arrangements being

made so she can do it from here and how many times have you arranged to do that? is there anything besides the ring he is taking for her? >> the hope is that we will arrange for a videoconference at some point and we're is still being determined. we may be able to do it here but she has gone down over johnson space center walthall * when mark was in quarantine for crude dinner so that is an easy trip to make a she needs. anything else he has brought, she sent him with an out which has been reported, which they hit on the shuttle. he has got that up there. i do not know lived he has brought anything like her.

>> i wonder if you could tell us about her future, if she can return to congress and her husband can return as an astronaut, what is her fifth -- his future? >> he will be back in 16 days, you can ask him that. as far as the congresswoman, we do not have a timeline. every patient is different recovers from these brain injuries. always she is focused on her recovery and really is every day. she works hard for people who know her. they know she is a determined person. our hope is that she can return to her life as quickly as possible. we do not have a sense yet, it is too early to tell. >> there was a large delegation

that flew with the president. did she get a chance to see at that time, were there members of congress? >> there were not at the viewing location. during the last trip, congresswoman wasson schultze -- wasserman-schultz was there. >> was she fully aware of the intense media questioning and

hershey -- is she fully aware of what happened on that january day? mark was waiting to tell her bits and pieces to put the entire puzzle together for her. is she aware of everything that took place? >> she is not aware of everything. as she processes of this, she learns more. the question about the press, we try to tell her there is extreme interest in your story. she is a bit surprised. she has not been exposed, she has not done interviews so she does not understand what that is like. i told her now, i am going down to do the press conference. we joke around and stuff like that. i think she is getting a sense of it. she understands the outpouring of support that has come from around the country.

the far corners know who she is. around the country, it has made a difference. for someone who was day in and day out from the hospital, recovering from something like this to be reminded there was -- they are loved and supported, and thought of around the world, it is moving. >> the congresswoman has been looking forward to this for so long, is there something else that is in the plans for this? is there some thought that they will get away somewhere, is there anything special that is being planned to mark his return? >> that is a good question. i know he has thought about that topic. it is hard to think beyond the flight.

there is a set of tasks ahead of all of us but mostly mark. i would suspect they will try to do something soon after his arrival. the crew is always busy after the arrival. as summer goes on, we will try to catch someone and it will take a couple days off. >> commander kellie reached up and pointed upward. was that a gesture toward her and she saw? >> we were not here during the walkout. he may have been pointing at the roof of the launch control center where spouses watched but we were not there. >> i was wondering how she is

putting her tweets out, if she is keyboarding them or telling you what she wants to express and that gets put on line. how was that working? >> we had some confusion about who was quitting. we are careful as you can see that we say staff or office or me. it is not her, it is us but we discuss with her like we discuss everything. >> i would like to say that prior to the shooting, she was an avid twitter. she used her ipad or iphone to do those kinds of things and since then, we're continuing to keep them engaging and fund which is what she always liked to use those tools for.

>> i talked to other family members and they said they were standing and watching this. was she standing or sitting? >> she was setting. sometimes when you are looking out, you can get off balance and we want to make sure we -- she was comfortable and able to gaze at that and not have to focus on spending and balancing which for her is something she works on. she is doing a great job but we want her to feel comfortable. she had the option but she sat for the lodge. >> congratulations to you and to her on making it as far as she has.

how has that affected her relationship or concept of god? >> i do not know. i cannot begin to answer the question. we would have to ask her. for anyone involved in something like this, you take stock of how precious life is. i cannot tell you specifically. >> since the shooting, you have stepped out as spokespeople and representatives for the rep. i was wondering at the time if there was a discussion about whether mark kelly would resume his work and go on commanding. -- commanding this flight. have you had concerns on what your lives of been, what you did with the office prior to the shooting.

is it his decision to fly, has it impacted your work in that sense? >> first, we have all provided, been a sounding board and she is going through this process but i would never question as to whether i thought it was right or wrong. i hope that he would do it because i know the -- she would want him to. weeks later, we realized she was going to make a good recovery right away. we were happy he decided to do it. it is funny. the last launch, or her spouse

to be an astronaut has a unique impact. we worked for the congresswoman. through these times when their personal life becomes the center of attention, there is some overlap. we have been supporting mark through gabby. our jobs have changed but the core remains committed to serving the constituents. we provide the bread-and-butter service. >> i am with the celebration,

independent newspaper. i am interested on how her office is continuing to operate. and are there -- i understand she cannot cast votes. is there any influence she has her you back in washington? who makes decisions in her absence. is it you or somebody else, can you describe how that works? >> i was speaking, the majority of our work is focused. that is where the bread and butter work of this office happens. before the shooting, that is the case. especially in congress and an environment that was provided. to your question, the defense --

we had a number of amendments, an amendment addressing traumatic brain injury for returning soldiers. the insurance program that covers veterans does not cover rehab for traumatic brain injury. you have a situation where the congresswoman is receiving better care than a soldier who was injured at war. that is not right. most people agree. we have taken that issue on. adam smith who is the ranking member and a close friend of the congresswomen, he and others on that committee have been supportive and were able to get as amendments to that bill that you were able to fill the impact. we are thankful for that when it comes to helping veterans. >> a to ask mark campbell -- i

wanted to ask mark kimball, have you seen her and her reaction? >> it was an emotional moment to see her but it was also extremely inspirational. i think it reminds us of why we are so devoted to her, why we enjoy working for her, and it was extremely encouraging. we have heard such reports about her recovery, but to actually see her and talk with her, it was a moving experience and a very -- i am glad i did. >> i want to make sure that we get all the questions we can.

but make sure arizona media get the a chance. >> i am steve helling. you mentioned she was sitting during the launch. she was sitting on a wheelchair or a stationary chair? you mentioned mark kelly had given her flowers, what kind? >> they were roses. we have a picture where are flashing their. the beautiful flowers that are in a vase with a bouquet. she was in a wheelchair which is for aes. the distance was kind of large. >> mentioned a note was sent up

with commander kellie. did she write that no, did she have help writing that no? that note? > >> no. >> at what point will she make an appearance? what is to determine when that happens? >> that is not a discussion we have had. the next medical hurdle is the operation that will replace a portion of her skull that was removed. it was taken off january 8 in a good split decision made by the trauma team in tucson. it is what is being credited

with saving her life along with a lot of luck. that surgery needs to happen. that is the next up we're looking at before we began to think of what happens. this is a slow process and requires a lot of patience. recovering from being shot in the head takes a lot. >> can you give us some sense of her level of comprehension, can complex concepts? what does her voice sound like now? >> she understands -- is not everything close to everything. there is hardly a moment that we have that we feel like she is not quite grasping. to the point where she had a

stands sarcastic humor, that is a more complex set of, -- complex ability to comprehend. it sounds as if it did before the shooting. she is able to fluctuate her volume level and the quality in terms of she's being serious or light-hearted. she has all that function and her speech is getting better. she is still seeing a lot of progress. >> right there in the front row? >> can you tell us anything about how trying the trouble was and how much it takes out of her to make the trip? >> it is not a lot of effort.

as much effort as any of us go through packing and travel. that whole thing. you get tired at the end of that. she does not have any particular concerns about flying are traveling. it was a smooth flight thanks to nasa and the folks that make that happen. >> it seems so trivial compares to these questions, but did she pick a song this morning, and what was it? >> it is a question a lot of folks have asked. and gabby have talked about that. i will let folks know when we're

able to announce that. >> you mentioned about the surgery. you were looking at me for that. obviously, the mission goes through june 1. are you going to wait until after the mission? is that going to be done -- >> that is a decision that doctors will make. when she is ready, there will do that. you will be the first to know. >> the other thing is that she has a birthday coming up. are there plans to be done or is this something -- is this going to be a celebration or low key, who were sometimes, you try to ignore it completely.

i'm wondering what is going on with that. >> that is a good question. we have spoken about it and he started thinking. now with the june 1 landing, they're going to do something but the plans are in the year. he is not one to let things like that go by. >> that is what we have at this point. we will turn to nasa for continuing coverage of the mission. thank you. >> house budget committee chairman paul ryan on the budget and the national debt. a discussion on the role of cra interrogations' in the mission that killed osama bin laden. after that, retired general james jones on middle east policy.

former national security advisor james jones testifies tomorrow morning before the senate foreign relations committee on u.s. relations with pakistan. that is on our companion network and 9:30 a.m. eastern. also, ken salazar and former deepwater horizon commander thad allen. you can see that here at 10:00 a.m. eastern. this june, the balance between security and we're ready. the limits of international law. the questions for eric posner. we will take your calls, e-mail, and tweets.

house budget committee chairman paul ryan says his plans would allow senior citizens to deny business to what he calls insufficient providers. he was at the economic club to talk about the economy, the budget, and the national debt. this is one hour. >> look at this crowd. apparently, the name has simple round here. -- some pull around here. i appreciate it. thank you for inviting me here. i am a big packer fan. i assume most of you are bears fans. it took a lot to invite me, but that does not mean we can all work together. i want to say one thing.

i stand ready to do what it takes to re-sign jay cutler. [laughter] despite talk of a recovery, the economy as underperforming. growth came in at 1.8%. we're not creating enough jobs to employ the new workers in the job market, let alone the people who lost their jobs. the rising cost of living is becoming a serious problem for many americans. the aggressive expansion of our money supply is clearly

contributing to major increases in the cost of food and energy. an even bigger threat comes from the cost of health care. a problem made much worse by the health care law enacted last year. most troubling, the unsustainable trajectory of government spending is accelerating our nation toward a ruinous debt crisis. his crisis has been decades in the making. republican administrations including the last one failed to control spending. democratic administrations have not been honest about the tax burden the that whawould be required. congress is controlled by both political parties and have failed to confront our entitlement crisis. there is plenty of blame to him to go around both political

parties. years of ignoring these drivers of our debt have left our nation in dismal shape. our debt is predicted to grow to more than three times the size of our economy. the trajectory as catastrophic. we see this coming. we will be spending 20% of our tax revenue paying interest on the debt. that is according to optimistic projections. if s&p downgrades our outlook, [no audio] this course is unsustainable. that is not an opinion. it is a mathematical certainty. if we continue down our current path, we're walking into the most preventable crisis in our nation's history. the question is, how to avoid

it? the answer is simple. we need to make responsible choices to -- today so our children do not have to make painful choices tomorrow. if you look at what is driving our debt, the explosive growth is health care costs spiralling out of control. by the time our children are raising families, every dollar we raised in revenue will be paying for three major entitlement programs. some of this is demographic. 10,000 baby boomers retire and start collecting medicare and social security but a lot of it is due to the fact that health care costs are rising faster than the economy is growing. revenue cannot keep up. it is basic math. we cannot solve our fiscal or economic challenges unless we get health care costs under control. the budget passed by the house last month takes credible steps

to controlling health care costs. it aims to do two things, to put our budget on a path of balance and to put our economy on a path of prosperity. i'm here to stress the point these goals go hand in hand with one another. stable government finances are essential to a growing economy. economic growth is essential to balancing the budget. the name is the path of prosperity. we're finally having a debate about how to address our fiscal problems but we are not having the debate we need to have. to an alarming degree, the budget debate has degenerated into a game of green eye shade arithmetic with many in washington including the president amending we trade restraints for large permanent tax increases. this sets up a debate in which we are arguing over how best to manage the decline of our

nation. in a framework that accepts ever higher taxes and rationed health care as givens. i call this a share scarcity mentality. the missing ingredient is economic growth. shared scarcity represents a pessimistic vision for the future of this country, one in which we pay more and we get less. i believe it would leave us with a nation that is less prosperous and less free. to begin with, chasing ever hire spending will decrease the number of makers in society and increase the number of takers. able-bodied americans will be discouraged. that is not who we are. worse, when it becomes obvious that taxing the rich does not generate enough revenue to cover all of washington's promises, austerity will be the only course left.

and that fuel the economic crisis will force massive tax increases on everyone in indiscriminate cuts and current beneficiaries without giving them time to prepare or just. given the expense of growth of government, many of these decisions will fall to bureaucrats will never elected. share scarcity impedes economic growth and results in harsh austerity and ends in a loss of freedom. president obama outlined an approach that in my view defiance shared scarcity. it relies on a plan to control costs that would give the board of 15 unelected bureaucrats in washington the power to ration our care. this would disrupt the lives of those who are in retirement and lead to waiting lists for today's seniors. i am criticizing policy, i need

to make something clear. i am not disputing that he inherited a difficult fiscal situation. he did. millions of american families have just seen their dreams destroyed by misguided policies and irresponsible leadership that cause a financial disaster. the crisis squandered our nation's savings and crippled its economy. the emergency actions in fall of 2008 did help arrest the ensuing panic. subsequent interventions such as the stimulus lot and the fed's unprecedented monetary easing have done more harm than good. the aftermath of the crisis, we need a government to repair the free market foundations of the american economy as it did under the rec administration in the 1980's by restraining spending, keeping taxes low, and forcing reasonable regulations and protecting the value of the

dollar. instead, leaders in washington embarked on a spending spree and after a flawed overhaul, the new -- encourages a sharp departure from their rules based monetary policy which created even more uncertainty. in the election, the voters sent a message. washington needs to try something else. we know what that something else might be because we know what has made growth possible. we need to answer that call for economic leadership by getting back to the foundations of economic growth. first, it is simple. we have to stop spending money we do not have and we -- that means getting health care costs under control. we have to restore common sense to the regulatory environment. so the regulations are fair,

transparent, and do not reflect and to uncertainty on employers. third, pretty simple again. we need to keep taxes low and in the year by year approached, his sole job creators have a certainty to invest in america. >> instead of using monetary stimulus to their lot washington's failures, because businesses and families need sound money. let me deal with each. the first foundation -- real spending discipline. you cannot get a real, sustainable growth by piling on to the debt. more debt means more uncertainty and more uncertainty means fewer jobs. the s&p downgraded the u.s. debt from stable to negative. if s&p is telling us america is a bad investment, they are not going to expand and create jobs in america at the rate we need

them to do so. mounting debt threatens the poorest and the most vulnerable citizens, because those who depend most on government would be hit hardest by a fiscal crisis. we have to repair our social safety net programs so they are there for those who need them most. this starts by building on the successful, a bipartisan welfare reforms of the 1990's. they saved this social selfish -- safety that by giving more power to govern is to create flexible programs the better serve the needs of their populations. we propose to make these programs solvent. as we strength and welfare for those who need it, we also propose to end it for those who do not weekend with a corporate welfare for those such as fannie mae and freddie mac, and those that got a free ride for too long. all these are necessary to get spending under control, but they are not enough.

we cannot avert a deatbt prices unless we address the health care costs. it is critical for solving our fiscal mess and for promoting growth. one reason so many people are not getting raises is that health care costs are eating into their paychecks. a second foundation -- addresses the growing of what i call crony capitalism. congressional republicans continued to advance reforms to stop regulatory bureaucrats from strangling job growth and innovation with red tape. we have advance legislation to stop the epa from imposing job- destroying energy caps on american businesses. we advance the legislation to redo the dodd-frank, that intensifies the problem of too

big to fail. we propose to repeal the new health care a lot and its maze of new health care regulations. it is bad enough that the law imposes a constitutional mandate on americans. it imposes new regulations on businesses which are stifling job creation. let me share with you one figure that serves as an indictment on the new health care law. so far, 1000 businesses and organizations have been granted waivers from the law's mandates. they may prevent job losses now, but they do not guarantee relief in the future. nor did they help those firms that lack the connections to lobby for waivers. this is no way to create jobs in america. true bipartisan health care reform starts by repealing this a very partisan law. the third foundation -- recognizes that we cannot get our economy back on track if washington tries to tax our way out of this mess.

the economics profession has been clear about this one. higher marginal tax rates create a drag on economic growth. as the university of chicago john cochran recently rodwriteoe "no country ever saw a big debt prices -- solve the debt problem by raising tax rates. countries that solved the problems grew so that reasonable tax rates times higher income produced tax revenue. countries that did not grow, deflated or defaulted." higher taxes are not the answer. fourth and finally, this foundation calls for a role- based monetary policy to protect working families and seniors from the threat of high inflation. the fed's departure from normal space monitor policy increased economic uncertain terry and and danger the central bank's independence. -- uncertainty and endangered

the central bank's independence. the other mandate being price stability. congress should end the fed's dual mandate and a task the central bank instead with a price goal all along runlong rn stability. these are our four foundations of economic growth. iand the house budget starts the process of restoring these foundations and building a prosperous future. we live to that by cutting spending and reforming programs that are driving our debt. reduce the deficit by 1/3 in our first year. the house budget is not but the budget on the path to balance. it actually pays off our debt over time. we cannot -- achieve this goal

by rubber stamping spending increases or raising increases and the national debt limit without reducing spending. our speaker john boehner made this very clear in a recent speech at the economic club at the york. if the debt ceiling has to be raised, we have to cut spending. the house budget contains $6.20 trillion in cuts. for every dollar the president was to raise the debt ceiling, we can show him plenty of ways to cut far more than $1 worth of spending. the size of the spending cuts should exceed the size of the president's call for a debt limit increase. [applause] our budget also gets health care spending under control by empowering americans to fight back against skyrocketing costs. our budget makes no changes for those in or near retirement and

offers future generations of strengthen medicare program they can count on with guaranteed coverage options. less help for the wealthy and more for the poor and the sick. there is widespread bipartisan agreement that the open ended, fee for surface structure of medicare is a key driver of health care cost inflation. ask any hospital executive. he will tell you the same thing. as my friend and health care policy expert like to say, medicare is not the train being pulled by the engine of rising costs. medicare is the engine and the rest of us are getting taken for a ride. this disagreement is not really about the problem. it is about the solution to controlling costs in medicare. if i could sum up the disagreement i need a couple of sentences i would say this -- our plan is to give seniors of the power to deny business to efficient providers.

[applause] their plan quite to the opposite is to give the government to deny care to seniors. we disagree also about how best to deliver the tax reform that americans have long demanded from washington. here is a quick start. 25 years ago in this club jack welch said, "i represent a company that does not pay taxes. funny, i guess things just never change." what i am trying to say is we need to broaden the tax base so corporations cannot game at the system. the budget calls for a scaling back or eliminating loopholes i am the tax code that are distorting economic success -- i need the tax code that are distorted economic incentives. we do this not to raise taxes,

but to create the space for lower tax rates in a level playing field for innovation and investment. america's corporate tax rate is the highest in the development world. are the businesses that need more competition. a fair tax code is fair for individuals as well. individuals, families, and employers spend 6 billion hours and $160 billion it each year figuring out how to pay their taxes. it is time to clear the tangle of credits and lower tax rate on everyone to promote economic growth and job creation. [applause] as so that is what we propose. the house budget does this by making the tax code simpler, flatter, fairer, more globally competitive and less burdensome for working families and small businesses. by contrast, the president says

he wants to eliminate deductions but he wants to raise rates. that includes raising the top rate, the one that all of those successful small businesses pay, to 44.8%. that would amount to $1.50 trillion tax increase on job creators. when we attacks our job creators more than our foreign competitors, they win, we lose. it is not a good idea. president said that only the richest people will be affected by this plan. look, class warfare may be clever politics but it is terrible economics. redistricting weld never creates more of its. further, the math is clear. the government cannot close its enormous fiscal gap by taxing the rich. this gap grows by trillions each year, representing tens of trillions and unfunded promises to future generations the government has no plan to keep.

there is a civic side to this as well. sewing's social unrest and class envy makes america weaker, not stronger. playing one group against another not only distracts us from the true sources of inequity in this country -- corporate welfare and crony capitalism and empty promises that betrayed the powerless. those committed to the mindset of shares scarcity are telling future generations, sorry. you will have to make do with much less. your taxes will go up, and because wash. cannot get government spending down. they are telling future generations, there is not a lot we can do about rising health care costs . government spending will go up and up and up. when we cannot afford to buy or cortex another dollar, we will have to give it to a board of on elected bureaucrats the power to tell you what kind of treatment you can and cannot receive. if we succumb to the view that our problems are bigger than we

are, if we surrender more control of our economy over to a governing class then we are truly has using shared scarcity over prosperity. that is the real class warfare that threatens us. a class of governing elite picking winners and losers and determining our destiny. look, we face a choice of two futures. we can continue to go down the path towards shared scarcity, or we can choose the path of renewed prosperity. the question before us is really simple. which path will our generation choose? in 1979, my mentor, jack kemp captured the essence of why we must choose the path to prosperity. "we cannot progress as a society by using government to diminish one another. the only way we can all have more is by producing more.

not by dickering over how to share less. economic growth must come first. for what it does, many social problems tended to take care of themselves and the problems that remain become manageable." there is a question i get a lot. from people at town halls. when you go run the country showing people these charts, that shows our debt is on track to cripple the economy, people start to ask you whether any plan, even a plan like the house budget could save america from a diminished future. most people think the country is down the wrong track. they say, congressman ryan, i know that you have to show opposition in public. and private, should we be bracing ourselves for the worst? it is a difficult question. it gives me pause. it is one that keeps me up at night. the honest answer is the one i am about to give. nobody ever got rich betting

against the united states of america, and i am not about to start. [applause] time and again, just when they looked like the era of american exceptionalism was coming to a close, we got back up. repress ourselves off and got back to work rebuilding our country -- we crushed ourselves off and got back to work rebuilding our country. we can do it again. america was knocked down by recession. it was threatened by a rising tide of debt. but we are not knocked out. we are america. and it is time to prove the doubters wrong once more, to show them that this exceptional nation is once again up to the challenge. thank you very much for having me today. i appreciate it. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute]

[captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> thank you, congressman. >> thank you kur. is thing on? >> yep. it is pretty of incredible that a green bay packer fan gets a standing ovation in chicago. we are going to pick up on a couple of questions. thank you to all of the audience. in today's chicago tribune, he said despite washington coming to grips with the fact that the debt threat is real, policy makers are not having the debate americans deserve. can you expound on that? >> what is happening is that we are in a green eyeshade our

arithmetic dance. how much taxes were raised and how much cutting we do. let's not forget about economic growth and prosperity. we need to keep our eye on job creation. the way and which we go into this debt crisis and how we handle it will determine the kind of crunch we are coming out of it. what we believe is the spending cuts and controls along with policies that get the economy growing, economic growth. that is the mixture that works. if we try to tax our way out of this problem, even part of the way, we will shut down prosperity carrot again, the 21st century is a globally competitive century. we cannot take for granted that our businesses can always try and survive and compete even when we tax them more than our competitors. so we have got to keep our eye and economic growth and the drivers of our debt. taxes are expected to go back towards where they have bent. probably as a spending doubles

and triples over the course of the center. when my kids are my age, instead of taking 20 cents of every $1 to pay for the government, but current federal government is scheduled to take 40 cents of every $1 just for this government at that time. it kicked out of our control. >> let's talk about that economic prosperity comment. the midwest has been hit by a many areas. your district as well. can you talk about and a innovative areas you have thought . >> you have to get to the basics. the basic building blocks of economic growth. sound money, lower and predictable competitive tax rates, spending under control so our dollar is stable and our interest rates are low, and getting the regulatory law has gone under control. u-- leviathan under control.

it is raising the fertile rate under which people have to clear to be successful. -- the hurdle rate under which people have to clear to be successful. there cannot be some bill in congress to spend on a program that fixes these things. the other thing that i say we and brace in our budget is to have to have a workforce that is educated there could be there for the high skilled jobs we need. let's prepare -- let's prepare a social safety net. let's have been geared to having people get back on their feet. there are 49 job training programs spread against nine different government agencies. we do not even measure whether they work or not. we want to collapse or consolidate them into a career scholarships so that the person -- we lost four of the plant's in the area i represent and the last couple of years. displaced industries. you want to have a system where it makes it easy for them to go

back to school to get new skills to get themselves back into a career. lifelong learning, getting skills so we can do this. we want miles like to add jobs up in -- miles white to add jobs. we want to have a skill set, a workforce that is there to do these kinds of jobs. our technical colleges are primed and ready to develop a curriculum. we want to have a system that works to further those goals. education is key. the federal government has a role to play, not a dominant role. >> let's talk about education. we will get into medicare. a lot of questions on that. on education, you public the commented that you like some of party duncan's -- arne duncan's comment. can you talk about what you

think the federal government's role is and where there are opportunities for both parties to work together to get towards a solution. >> i think he is one of the most impressive member of the president's cabinet. he is an impressive guy. he is a person reaches across the aisle. that is noted because we do not see a lot of that these days. first of all, let's remember that most of the money is spent and raised at local and state government. the federal government is a junior partner when it comes to k-12 education, but the federal government imposes lots of regulations and unfunded mandates. idea is the biggest unfunded mandate we impose. the federal and state government have an obligation to finance that to free up your local property tax dollars so they can go towards customizing economic -- education reform and needed locally. the other thing -- charters, schools shores -- all those innovative education ideas need to be tested. we should get washington off of the way, which is preventing

them from doing those sorts of things. look at what mitch daniels has done. it is impressive. we have similar kinds of reforms in milwaukee and wisconsin. we want to expand these laboratories of education reform, but at the federal and level and post secondary education, job training, helping people -- i am 41 years old. i have a lot of bodies from high school that lost their jobs at the fgm plant in jamesville. a lot of my friends find themselves in their 40's or 50's with nothing. we have to have an ability for them to go back to school. one of my buddies is going back to school to learn a new trade. he is so happy. another friend of mine went back to get a degree.

now he is his own contractor with his own business, making jobs, providing for his family. those kinds of things, that kind of job training scholarship that goes to the person so they can go to society is a smarter way to go. that is where the federal government has a bigger role to play versus k-12 things. >> thank you. both parties seem to be worlds apart on the budget debate. are you willing to compromise with senate democrats and president obama to get a grand bargain? will republicans allow tax revenues to be part of the conversation? >> i do not think we will have a big, grand global pabargain. we are putting our budget out there as our starting point. we submitted a budget that balances the budget and pays off debt and reforms entitlement programs to make them solvent. we have yet to see anything from the president or from senate democrats that comes anywhere close to solving the problem.

as far as who is putting plans out there, we have done that. we are waiting for our partners on the other side of the aisle to contribute something. do we have to have some compromise? of course we do. the way we look at revenues is if we look as our revenue as a source to fix the problem, that it takes the pressure of the problem which is spending. pendi. spending is the problem. i am for having higher revenue coming into the federal government. i do not think you get that by raising tax rates. i think you get that through pro-growth economic policies and tax reform that raises economic growth. then you get higher revenues that way. i subscribe to the gary becker school of thought. i see him there. a living legend before us. that is, the way to increase revenues. the other problem we have is iff weblink in this moment and

showed that both political parties to not have the courage to address the spending crisis we have, then what kind of confidence will bond markets have after that? the biggest mistake we could make is rubber stamping and debt limit increase showing we do not have any chance of getting anything under control. we've got to have serious down payments on spending cuts and controls to buy ourselves time, so that whatever we do not resolve is resolved soon. i believe this next election will be the most important elections in our lifetimes. it will be a choice of two futures. i believe we owe it to our constituents to give them a choice. what kind of country do you want? the what the historic american ideal -- limited government, economic freedom. or do we want to go down the other path, a cradle to grave welfare state? those are harsh words, but the

least we do is give you a choice so you can pick what you want. >> you mentioned political courage. i have seen you where you talked about the third row -- medicare. and you looked at it as if he were a koala bear. can you talk about what it is to have political courage and what it means for others? >> you have to be willing to lose your job to be good at these jobs. you just do. i am serious. [applause] the other thing i would say is i think the public is ahead of the political class. the problem we have, and both parties do this, is to put something out there that proposes change -- anything that is bold, the other party will use it as a political weapon. then that fear of that political weapon paralyzes the political system. we have had this paralysis for a long time. republicans to democrats and democrats to republicans. i, for one, what we are trying to do is break through that.

put ideas out there and, yes, grab the third ralph. i think the government is ahead of us. my district goes from jamesville, kenosha, lake geneva. you all know lake geneva. it is a district that went for dukakis, clinton, gore and obama. i put these ideas out there in 2008 and in 2010. i believe that people are ready to be talked to like adults, not like children on these issues. when you give people the facts, when you show them what we are trying to do, i think people want to see us fix this problem. political courage means worry more about our economy in the next generation than you are about the next election, then it will be fine at the end of the day. >> let's get into medicare.

your budget includes medicare and medicaid reforms and calls for a full repeal of the health care law. how you address the uninsured and what about rising health care costs for businesses and are you committed to replace not just repeal the health care law? >> yes. for sure, the answer is yes on that, especially. given that medicare and medicaid are the greatest drivers of our debt. those two programs alone are the biggest contributors. you have to restructure not only how these programs work to save them. the trustees gave us a new warning that medicare is going bankrupt a lot faster than we thought it was. if we do this no, we can do it on our own terms as a country. meaning, you do not have to pull the rug out from under people who have retired. people who are on medicare. they have organized retirements on this program. our whole point is that, do not change their benefits, but in order to do that, you have to reform this program for the next

generation. those of us under 44, you have to make -- under 54, you have to make it a solvent system. the way to do that, we believe, is not by giving a panel of 15 bureaucrats the authority to micromanage, rationed, and price control medicare. that is the law now and that is being imposed on current seniors. we were killed this. let younger people when they become medicare eligible select among a list of medicare guaranteed coverage options. it works like this system at that by as a federal employee have. in this case, you subsidize the person's insurance. if they are poor and sick, you subsidize the more. give support to people and did the most and less support those who need it the least. doing it this way, the cbo makes this program solvent, secure some my generation can count on it when we retire, and it helps

solve the debt crisis. the question is, can this be done? look, i hardly think that this is some radical idea. this is the same kind of recommendation that president bill clinton's bipartisan commission to save medicare recommended in the late 1990's. the idea comes out of the brookings institution. it works like current medicare benefits work today. prescription drugs works like this. medicare advantage works like this. by your medicare supplement insurance works like this. private providers competing for our business. we believe the best way to get at this issue, health inflation, it is by giving the patient the power, a consumer directed a system where the providers, hospitals, insurers, doctors compete against each other for our business as consumers. we spend 2.5 times per person on healthcare in this country than

any other industrialized country. so we need a system like all other market based sectors of our economy where we have transparency on price, on quality, and on economic incentive to act on those things. so we have apples to apples metrics to comparison we can shop. i do believe we need to do tax exclusion. we subsidize people in the higher income brackets and then at the lower income brackets. i think that is upside down. we want a system where the individual is in the driver seats. not some bureaucrats. we would reform the insurance laws for those with pre- existing conditions. we do that to risk pools. we bring more competition to the health care sector. if we do this, i think we will be fine. we will not only grow the economy, but we can have

insurance to -- for everybody who does not have it. we can do it without breaking the bank or taking this entire sector of the economy over by the government. [applause] >> in a speech you gave, you addressed the house budget committee, he said that our debt is the product of ex over -- of acts over many congresses over amnmany years. can you expand on the notion that the problem we face is a product of both parties? >> look at what politics rewards. it rewards the politician that makes an empty promise to the voter. it is pretty simple. if you want to get elected, you promise somebody something. you get elected. we've got to stop that. what we are trying to achieve here -- we will see if this works -- [laughter] is turn the political reward

system away from rewarding a politician who keeps making the empty promise to the political leader who speaks honestly with people about where we stand as a country and what it will take to get this thing fixed. that is what we have to address. both parties have done this, but we are on board time. the way i look at this is, we are -- one of the most unpleasant experiences i had was tarp. i was in all of those meetings where we had henry paulson and ben bernanke hyperventilating. it was an awful situation. that crisis caught us by surprise. we watched the money markets meltdown. that caught us by surprise. let me ask you this. what would you think of your president board member of congress if they knew it was coming, if they knew what was happening, when it was going to happen, and they knew exactly what to do prevent it from happening and had the time to do it, but they chose not to

because it was bad politics? what would you think of the person? that is where we are right now. this debt crisis is the most predictable economic crisis we have ever had. and the thing that is stopping us from fully fixing this thing is politics. we have got to get through that. that is why some of us are putting these plans out there to try and move this conversation to the level it has to get to. we are not there yet, but we are sure going to keep trying. [applause] a nerve inouched and the nation with your ability to convey this message. you said respect the president as well. it is a mutual admiration society. can you talk a little bit about what it is like to be the voice that discusses these issues with someone of that statute and how you take that on? >> i do not think about -- about

it too much like that. my job. i grew up studying economics. i wanted to go to the university of chicago and go into the field of economics. then i ended up being a politician. that did not go so well, i suppose. i'm joking. i am chairman of the house budget committee. when you get a job like this, it is your job to look at the fiscal finances of this country. and they are downright scary. the thing is, most people involved i need these things to think about budgets like they thought of at the beginning of the decade or in the 1990's. because of the recession, the numbers moved up and it is a scary situation. we do not have a lot of time left before we have a debt crisis on our hands. all of those things we take for granted -- the world's reserve currency -- all of those things are threatened. i see it as my job, elected by my colleagues, to take this post, to do what ever i can to

address this issue, to be a paul revere and get this country having this kind of conversation. with respect to the president, we have a very different philosophies. i have a lot of respect for him, but i do not respect the political tone that has been injected in this conversation which is counterproductive, not productive. we have to make a choice between two theories of government, of philosophies. one which i would characterize as the traditional american idea where the goal of government is to protect our natural rights and promote economic opportunities we can make the most of our lives, where we are defined by the characteristic of equal opportunity. versus what i think is a different philosophy, one that we have seen on display in many other nations, which is the goal of the government grows to equalize the results of our lives. that is shared scarcity and managed decline.

we delicate so much more power to unelected people in bureaucracies and they try to micromanage these busy things in our live. i think it is a fatal conceit. i think it is at the core of what separates us. >> you mentioned to the debt ceiling. let's get into that. what conditions are attached to a raise? if you require a dollar for dollar cut in budget for each dollar in cuts, were you envisage the cuts coming from? >> we have a good menu to pick from. we also propose a budget process reforms. there are three basic process reforms in our budget, statutory caps on discretionary spending. it got turned off in the last decade. we also propose a debt targets or debt limits within forced mechanisms, meaning your debt rises above a certain level, something kickstand. we also proposed a global spending cap on government as a

share of gdp. this is the bipartisan cap in the senate. we're not taking anything off the table. certain entitlements are taken off the table by the democrats, first of all, i think we should not do that. i disagree with that. we have also proposed $719 million from other areas, farm programs, that are in dire need of reform. discretionary spending went up 24% in the last two years. if the government just gave a number of executive agencies triple digit increases in their budgets. that is totally unsustainable. there are lots of areas where we believe we should be cutting back on spending. i think what you will see at the end of the day is a mixture of spending cuts measured in trillions and caps on spending to lock in those gains.

then, wherever it is we do not have agreement on, whatever big issue, we owe it to go to the country with our plan to fix this reverses the president's plan. that is what we will end up doing. >> let's get into defense. uncritical of putting -- on off- budget. an emergency supplemental said that a poor way to do this. can you talk about your path to prosperity? >> we budget for the war. to the president's credit, he does, too. the last administration did not do that. they kept using emergency funding designation, outside of the spending limits to find wars. when i was in the minority, we rode our budget to budget for the war. we now have consensus to budget for these things and trade off. number one. number two, you can't throw $700 billion at any government agency

and not expect a lot of ways. we do but $178 billion in defense spending. we dedicate $100 to troops and $78 billion for deficit reduction. that is what secretary gates recommended. i would like nothing more for a budget for peace dividend. here is the problem. we do not have peace right now. we have our men and women of their fighting on two, maybe you could argue a third front in libya. we have to back them up. they have to have the resources they need to do their jobs. that doesn't speak to foreign policy decisions. they are there. we are committed. we cannot under fund or de-fund them. yes, that, too, should be a contributor to deficit reduction. >> a couple more questions. some of your critics -- "the new

york times" columnist paul krugman. >> never heard of him. >> you would raise taxes for 95% of the public. newt gingrich had a few comments related to the budget. how to address some of these issues? curious as to what your latest perspectives are. >> a first of all, for the tax portion. that is not an accurate statistic. we used cbo numbers. we do not use somebody else's back of the envelope calculations. we are not talking about cutting tax revenues. we are talking about revenue neutral tax reform. this is where class warfare get into it. the people who enjoy the most tax deductions, the tax shelters are the folks i made the top two brackets. you have a dollar of income park into a text shelter and it is taxed at zero. if you take away the tax shelter

then that dollar is taxes. by depriving tax shelters and lowering tax rates, you are subject to more of that person's income to taxation at a lower rate. here is the key characters like the present fiscal commission, which i served on, supported democrat. they agreed that you need to lower tax rates in america to create jobs and broaden the tax base. brought and the tax base, lower the tax rates, because, again -- broaden the tax base, we are taxing our job creators at tax rates higher than our foreign competitors, whether it is a corporation or a successful small business. the president has in his but did a plan to raise the top tax rate to 44.8%. i do not even know what illinois income-tax rate is. ours is between 6% and 7%, and i

know yours just went higher. the point is, we will tax all of these subchapter s corporations. drive around wisconsin and look at the outskirts of town. there will be an industrial park. it will have a lot of businesses that will have a 50-500 employees. odds are they are paying their taxes as individuals. that is where most of our jobs come from. if we keep cranking up their tax rates, in the guise of class warfare, we are going to stifle economic growth and shut down job creation. [applause] >> on the newt thing, i would simply say, these ideas we are proposing are the most gradual, sensible things we could come up

with. they replicate the same kinds of reforms as the prescription drug plan. it came and 41% below cost. why? because it gives seniors the power. seniors get to choose which among competing private plans they could select from for their drug benefit. the provider knows that the senior can fire them if they do not perform, if they do not give them competitive prices for quality service. next year, they can get somebody else. so they compete for that senior's business. that has brought premiums down and saved taxpayers. so what we are saying is replicate that kind of reform for people 54 and below when they become medicare-eligible. this does not take effect for 10 years. hardly is this radical. what is truly radical is the status quo. a bankrupt medicare. kicking the can down the road, going tens of trillions dollars deeper in the hole every year we do not fix the situation.

we court of debt crisis and then is austerity. you have given current seniors no time to prepare and your tax increase and the economy to slow us down. that is the result of political paralysis if we keep it up. >> let's talk about kicking the can down the road. you spoke about and need of the generation to pass on to the next generation of better america. can you talk a little bit about that and what it means to you as a leader in today's economy and nation and political debate on how you can improve that thinking? >> i will talk about it as of dad. jan an dd i have three kids. i ask the cbo to run numbers all the time. what will the tax rate have to be on my children when they are my age raising their children, if we just raise taxes to fix this problem? they said, we have an intergenerational accounting model. we can do that. here is what they said. the lowest income tax bracket

right now that lower income people pay is 10% goes up to 25%. middle income tax rate goes to 66%. the top tax rate, the small businesses pay, goes up to 88%. then this could have negative effects on the economy, the cgbo said. [laughter] forecasts the economy going for. their model a year ago crashed in 2054, because the computer simulation could not envision any way the economy could continue because of debt. this year, the computer crashes in 2037. our government economic estimators cannot conceive of a way our economy can continue passed that year. they are telling us without a shred of doubt that we are giving the next generation and

inferior standard of living, less prosperity. we have never done that before. look, like the ryans here, my family when we stopped growing potatoes in ireland. and made something of ourselves. each preceding generation sacrifice, worked hard, they took on the challenges, whether it was depression or world war or whatnot so the next generation could be better off. that is what we do in this county. ary. if we do not turn this thing around, we will be giving our kids a lower standard of living. it's not too ladte to turn this around. we want to get on with fixing it. >> last question. [applause] to pick up on that point.

you obviously have a great sense of midwestern ethic and authenticity, that is why so many people are supportive of you. >> it is the packer fan thing, too. >> we got to work on that. can you talk about your political mentors -- dimension to jack kemp earlier. were you derive your authenticity and how would drives you going for? >> ideas. i lost my dad when i was a young guy. jack kemp and bill bennett were among my professional mentors. my mom was a big mentor to me. i was a big reader when i was younger. i have read gary becker and stich or and friedman. i grew up on those ideas -- and stiegler. i grew up with an interest in economics. when you get into public

policies, the whole idea is to apply those lessons to the problems of the time. it is not as if we had to reinvent the wheel. we know what ideas built this country. . freedom, responsibility, limited government, self-determination -- all those things made us great. they will continue to do so. we just have to reapply those founding principles to the problems of our time. that is what we tried to do i need this budget, and we will be fine. that is what makes me sleep soundly at night. i really think americans want america. i do not think they want another country. and so, it is those mentors and those of writers that have inspired me. i am a big church of safan as w. an internal threat -- is dead and economic stagnation. i think we will turn around, because i think this country is not done with exceptionalism. so, thanks.

>> thank you. [applause] >> on behalf of the economic club, thank you very much to and griffin for bringing the congressman here. we appreciate your being here. thank you. the meeting is adjourned. >> in a few moments, a discussion on the role of cia interrogations' in the mission

that killed osama bin laden. and an hour and a half, former national security adviser james jones on middle east policy. on "washington journal" tomorrow morning, democratic rep resentative donna edwardxs will call on the budget. michael still looks at the gop presidential field. we will discuss the work of the office of civil liberties with former policy adviser sahra aziz. "washington journal" is live on c-span every day at 7:00 a.m. eastern. >> i am newt gingrich and i am announcing my candidacy for president of the united states because i believe we can return america to hope and opportunity. >> with the field of republican presidential hopefuls are beginning to take shape, of all the candidates announcements on the road to the white house and look back on their careers with

cspan online. it is what you want when you want. >> next, a discussion on the role of cia interrogations' in the operation that killed osama bin laden. panelist focused on whether the enhance interrogation techniques which some consider torture were responsible for some of of the success of the mission. the forum is moderated by john yu who helped draft the regulations for the bush-era policies. this is an hour and a half. >> it is my great pleasure to be

the moderator for this panel on cia interrogations'. rather than presentations followed by discussion of the panel, we will do this as a round table. so my job is just to ask questions, if i can get a word in edgewise. for some of it, there are several lawyers on the panel. [cell phones rings] that reminds me, please turn off your cell phones. that goes for the panelists, too. no cheating. this panel is prompted by the successful mish operation that killed osama bin laden and the role of interrogation methods i not.at success or i hope this will open up some of the discussion to other issues, including detention, use of drones, and what to expect next

on the war on terror from the obama administration. let me start off just by asking about the news in the papers the last few days, which is whether any of the intelligence that was used to locate, to identify and locate the couriers who led the cia to abadobatt, whether any of that came from interrogation methods by the bush and administration. just mccasey had a widely read op ed in "washington journal", to which senator john mclean made issue and asked him to withdraw his earlier statement. i wanted to start off by giving judge mccasey the opportunity --

>> as another character named michael said, this is not personal. this is business. my business has to do with facts and law. the fact is that muhammaed who was subjected to advanced interrogation techniques, including waterboarding, to disclose the nickname which was the name of the carrier actually used in the course of the questionings that took place after the inherent and -- enhance interrogation techniques. the questioning takes place later on when they become compliant. was there a memo in the file beforehand contain at name? yes absolutely. it was disregarded because it came from somebody and significant. it was not regarded as

significant. then when not only did that come out, but he then said that that person was no longer affiliated or had nothing to do with al qaeda, and it was married up with later facts that were learned, it became obvious he was covering for him. that was a very significant fact. facts.a mosaic of so much for facts. as to law, the techniques to which she was subjected, including waterboarding, were not in violation of the law at the time. that was disclosed in memos of the office of legal counsel, that i was tasked at reviewing at my confirmation hearings, did review. then i found by the time i conducted my review, the program had changed and that technique

and a number of others had been eliminated. so there's no need to express the view, plus, the fact there were other statutes passed since 2005-2006 -- the military commissions act -- that changed the landscape or may have changed the landscape to what was permissible and what was not. to me, the real issue, the real current issue is not whether there was or was not a tile or mosaic that stemmed from that, but rather, what we have in place now to exploit the trove of material that we got from the laden's -- from bin laden's residents. there was a huge amount of intelligence obtained from this raid, which was a commendable way to do it, not with a drone which would have eliminated all of that.

people could disclose valuable information. what program do we have in place to interrogate those people? we have the army field manual, which al qaeda uses as a training menu. has for years. so we do not have that. and we should. nor, and this is an issue that ben has written on and explored much better than i could, we do not have the detention policy. we have an improvisational regime of whether we detain people or turn them over to other people or use predator drones. we need a detention policy as well. >> let me turn to the head of human rights first . to respond or comment on the attorney general's comments . >> thank you, john.

i just want to start by saying that i appreciate very much the opportunity to be on this panel. it is a great testament to the american enterprise institute, and i say the same thing to my folks all the time, that we need not to be just be talking amongst ourselves. but we need to be talking with each other. i wanted to say just one word about where i come from in this debate. you know, i grew up in a military family. my father was a naval academy graduate. he served during the cold war. i grew up keenly aware of the dangers and the sacrifices we ask our men and women in uniform and their families to make. and also with a very strong sense of what our country stands for, the values for which we and our men and women i n uniform

fight. my own view as an adult on this issue are very much shaped by a group of retired generals and admirals who believe very strongly that torture and cruel treatment of prisoners is wrong. that group is led by two four- star marine corps generals. and they agree with the general petraeus and senator mccain, which is the controversy about who owns the bin laden success, which brings us here today. that torture not only violates our fundamental values and our principles as a nation, but it is counterproductive in the fight against our enemy and it puts our men and women in uniform at greater risk. what was the role of torture? the debate in the op-ed