disclose or ex-press or anger. we have to put building blocks to ensure that this legislator accepts the challenge that our bishop martin has given the church when he said the church can never rest until the last victim has found peace. i put forward to you that we cannot rest either until we've done our best to give victim what is theirs. >> thank you, deputy. >> you have 15 minutes. from the outset i wish to state that why we support the motion, we would have preferred to see the stronger language in the previous report. it contributed to the undermining of the frameworks of irish state and of the irish bishop. they expressed condemnation and

we express condemnation of the scandalous intervention. the events that took place are documented in the report missed a considerable amount of time but it did not take place 100 years ago. there was still abuse going on when preparations for the commencement of the deliberations of the committee on the constitution amendment on children were underway. it comes right up to a couple of years ago. what we see here is a 400-page document that shows that 17 years after the brendan smith debattle brought the government in 1994. the official church when the state failed to make mandatory requirement in place earlier. bishop mcgee held canon law superior to the civil law of the land and that disposition directly led to the abuse of more children to not adhering

to correct procedures an more children were placed at risk. how many more children have to be harmed before we take action on this neglect. the catholic church still controls many of our schools. as stated this report investigated incidents which only took place a short number of years ago. i shiver to think, minister, of the real facts and the full story. with more reports and inquiry into the lack of adherence will be commissioned. they refused to answer questions from the commission of inquiry and claimed diplomatic immunity. this is the same pope who issued vatican instructions to the bishops in this country. i would expect if a school system operated in a third party state within ireland

consistently failed to report allegations of child sexual abuse against its students by teachers and employees, the ambassador of that state would be required to answer questions and if he or she failed to do so, they would be asked to leave. the church is not above the law. it is high time they stopped thinking that they were. father lombardy said his remarks had been made in a personal capacity but this is the sort of disingenuous double speak that must end. bishop mcgee has no interest in protecting the children of cork and pawned that authority off to someone else who had no interest. he act ily, knowingly lied. he concealed information about the crime committed by the priests within his diocese. he actively engaged in a reckless and at times willful endangerment of children.

there are prosecutions to be face bid those who perpetrated crimes against children either through directly abusing them or being complicit in the coverup of their abuse and nothing less, i fair, will bring to an end this lurid regime. 2/3's of complaints made between 1996 and 2008 were not reported to the guardian and nothing was passed. while members of this house including the current ministers for children an justice were sitting in a room deliberating on the rights of children, bishop mcgee was not reporting allegations of abuse. they may have apologized for this report but that's not good enough the official church has disgraced itself in the handling of this most serious of issues. it is disgusting and it goes right to the top. the wish shps, along with the vatican, played a major role in aggravating the level of abuse of children in ireland. the report is measured in its

tone and found that the vatican's reaction to the 1996 framework document was entirely within council. it gave any bishop the freedom to ignore it. we need cast iron guarantees from the church that they'll adhere to the civil law when it comes to reporting abuse, and will do so as of now with immediate effect. they have a moral only fwation to do so. however, moral obligations on members of the clergy have not work sod well in the past so we also need cast iron guarantees from the state that if there are more flagrant breeches -- breaches of the law which we have seen on many occasions in the past, they must be held to account. for the vatican to state that the framework document was merely a study document, rather than an official document, was something to shortt of an insult to the survivors and

victims of abuse. they stated they had serious reservations about moral -- of a moral and canon call nature of the document. it's up to the vatican to state exactly what they meant by having moral reservations regard regular porting jail gigses of abuse or the actual knowledge of the fact that in some cases, clerics were indeed child molesters. the vatican refused to explain to the commission in 2005, when the guidelines had been updated, why they were not recognized officially by the church. monsignor o'callaghan actively on stralkted the employment of those guidelines. it is this complete and unreserved disregard that some senior voices in the church have for child protection in this case that is so hard to stomach. there have now been three statutory inquiry into abuse in church diocese in ireland where child protection procedures

have been found wanting and again, i ask the question, will there be more. only in 2009 the cardinal was saying bishop mcgee was, in his words, dependable and reliable and didn't need to resign. this is a man who had been found by the church's own national board for safeguarding children to be presiding over practices that were inadequate and dangerous. that's a scandal in itself. many people said we can learn from all of these reports. it is hard to see how so many reports highlighting similar failures can all have different lessons to take away. however in looking at the lessons that we can learn from the report, i wonder what the min -- whether the minister would agree whether there are things we can teach others. last december, the executive in the six candidates announced setting up in the north. they reported to the executive

a fortnight ago and a decision would be made about how to address crimes committed by the institution, both those run by the catholic church and state run stewsings in the -- institutions in the autumn. the minister will be aware that a numb of catholic church diocese across ireland stretch across the border. in looking at possible future inquiries into the diocese, it will be useful to coordinate with the initialtive under way in the six downies and might be of benefit to get the benefit of our experience down here both among victim groups and wider civil society of how the inquiry into abuse in the 26 counties have been handled. i know a number of such meetings have already taken place but i wonder would it benefit from a more structured, formal approach and i ask the gentleman to consider this. if the vatican is showing contempt and disregard for the

abuse investigations we have put in place, it is only in keeping with the articles with which it approaches the mechanism for the protection of international human rights. the vatican was due to submit its second report on the rights of the child in 1997 and i would ask the goth to resource these bodies accordingly. they must be absolutely capable of carrying out out -- out the responsibilities, they must be effective. procedures as we have seen ad nauseam are of no use unless they are properly implemented and minister, i wish you and the minister for children well in ensuring that these measures are indeed in place at the earliest opportunity. >> the next number of speakers, there are five speakers, each with three minutes.

john hall han please. >> i'm sharing time with deputies murphy, sullivan, wallace. i'll be very brief. like everybody else i was horrified about this particular report. that the abuse went unreported is utterly reprehensible. i will now call on the government to break off diplomatic relations with those who shield hill. i believe the papal nunzio should be sent from ireland, the office stripped of its title, the teen of diplomatic corps, while the ambassador should be removed from the vatican. if any other foreign government conspired to break the law here, their ambassadors would be expelled. what happened here is that the vatican, a sovereign state, has

refused to cooperate with the investigation into the criminal conspiracy against children in this country. they instruct us, our citizens, their priests and their bishops, not to comply with our law and to break our law. we will not tolerate this from any other government or any other state. ireland has a legitimate claim that the vatican state has breached the league of principle of noninterference in the internal affairs of the sovereign state. they are party to various conventions. one of the conventions includes the vienna convention of diplomatic relations, 1961, which requires that without prejudice to have privileges and immunities. it is the duty of the person enjoying such privileges and immunities to respect the laws of the receiving state and they have a duty not to interfere with the intefrpbl affairs of

the state. -- with the internal affair hofse state. the holy see has conducted itself that belies any relationship between themselves and the irish state. the government strengthened rules to make sure their fiscal laws comply with e.u. surely the violation of children and sheltering of abuse perpetrators should take precedence over suspicious financial transactions. i would urge the minister of foreign affairs to use every challenge available to challenge the failure of the vatican state to report on its compliance under u.n. convention of the children's rights since 1997 and under the united convention against torture, 2003.

i draw the minister's attention to article 6 and 19 convention rights of the child and the failure of the holy see to ensure in its own report and its own past in conjunction with the irish short that all cases of sexual abuse are reported. further more, a clear statement -- i'm just finishing. a clear statement at the privacy of the convention over canon law is required and i would urge the government to set a time frame from the vatican without delay and bring the response back to us. >> three minutes. i'll let you know at one minute. >> ok. i felt really angry after reading the report because it shows the closure has not -- the cloture has not changed for many people in the catholic church in ireland. it takes great courage to come forward and i applaud those who

did. the years of not being believed and being treated as though they were in a confessional was totally wrong. the law was sub vered in favor of the vatican. we have outsourced things to the roman catholic church. it was an institution placed in a privileged place. even after the revelations, there are people within the church, even after all the revelations that were people still within the church who still didn't get it. the protection -- protection of the church is still alive and there are many still in denial. i'm not religious myself however i watched the way archbishop derrick martin has been sidelines on the issue. he was one of the few people who have given me any real confidence that protection of children is an absolute and must be no ifs, and, buts or maybes. that's the approach he's been

taking. his obviously ail generalation sends out the most appalling message, that those who are questioning his approach are more likely to take the approach of monsignor o'callaghan who said why should we take it on ourselves to report when the complainant doesn't want that to be done and he failed -- i don't know how he could have failed to understand that the requirement was there to protect other children. he seems to have been completely trusted by bishop mcgee, who on page 6 of the report said he was shocked to discover in 2008 that the framework document was not being implemented. how could bishop mcgee after all that's been revealed feel that way. we're told in 2003, bishop mcgee had a series of meetings to be held for all priests of the diocese to discuss the persistence crisis of the church in regard to child

sexual abuse, it's even more outrageous he did not suche vise those who authorized to act on his behalf. i welcome the announcement that statutory report -- a stamp -- statutory reporting requirement will include a legal duty on the state to share relevant information and cooperate in the best interest of the child. it is, after all, the responsibility of the state to ensure that systems are in place that are capable of handling complaints in a comprehensive manner. >> 10 seconds. >> ok. i'm not at all confident that the system is robust enough and we've seen folks who -- social workers complain that their -- they're being blamed. i'm also appalled by the complaints being made about how people are being treated in the

lower court and i hold that that's something that could be addressed in response to this report. >> [inaudible] >> the catholic diocese of cloyne further accentuates the problem. they have this ability to treat young children and children so cruelly, allowing abuse to continue. other nations have had their dark moments. the jewish nation has had the holocaust, the cambodian nation had their killing field. we have had this abuse carried out by those in authority in the church and within families and while we may not have had the deaths others have had,

there is a part of every young person that dies buzz of abuse. there were reservations about some of the priests while in training but they were obviously attracted to a position that gave them such scope for abuse. as one victim put it, damaged limitation rather than a genuine wish to help unreservedly. when the church did have guidelines in place which were very clear on the duty to report to the guardian, this was not done. there were -- they were keeping inadequate records and also trying to keep the complaint within the church. the complaints were handled properly. the complainants came forward to give evidence. the naming of the vatican also. the widespread sexual abuse of cler irks not just in ireland but in america and other countries with horrific effects. equal hi heartbreaking for those in religious life who are

as appalled as we are by those in the same clace. cloyne said the standards adopted by the church would afford proper protection to children. that's the key, inch. . it also goes on to say standards set by the state are less precise and more difficult to implement. the state cannot afford to take the high moral ground here when there are cases being investigated of 200 young people who died in state care. we had the case just last week of the family who were abused. i ask that the bill include the national vetting bureau and children first guidelines. we have the measures now but we have to have the resources to match those. >> i also agree that government is right to be critical of the vatican. but i also think the change of

wording from the original text is to be regretted. condemn has been downgraded to deplore and just looking at the dictionary definitions of them, condemn is to declare to be reprehensible, wrong or evil. whereas deplore means to feel or express grief to regret strongly. to consider unfortunate or deserving of depreciation. i certainly must refer to -- much prefer the use of condemned in this situation. there's absolutely no excuse for the behavior of the vatican. i wouldn't be in favor of expelling it because it's porn to keep communication lines open. but i think they have been deplorable.

i also think the government should have to look at the whole relationship. the church has played too big a part in the fabric of our state and the sooner they're divided, the better for both parties. we need to focus on the conduct of state officials in this case and government departments, sufficient as the office for minister of children and youth affairs which is strongly criticized within the report. the commission found it interesting to contrast the investigations carried out by the h.s.c. and mr. eliot on behalf of the national board in this case. all investigations have access to the same material. the h.r.s. -- h.s.c. only look at the failure of reporting, but in the other he took a look at the approach.

when they kid send a report to them, he seemed more eager for -- to absolve themselves of any influence or responsibility in the area. and i'd like -- it would be interesting to be get some answers as to why that was the case. the commission makes it clear that the official was more concerned with protecting the minister from strog get involved. this is the official who actually asked mr. eliot to withdraw his report, redo it in a nicer way, a bit softer manner, and send it on to the h.s.e. they make it clear they were more concerned with protecting the minister from having to get involved instead of dealing

with the problem, which is the failure of the diocese to not implement child protective laws. it requires the minister to refer any catholic diocese which is not complying with either documentations of the firm's report or lines on child protection to the commission for investigation. this was not the responsibility of the h.s.c., it was a responsibility of the minister who along with his officials appeared to have wanted. >> the pain and suffering that people who have been victims of abuse by church institutions is just too horrific really to describe and in that context the catalog of abuse and

coverup by the church authorities of that and failure to act is an absolute outrage and i think that's why this motion is a good start in being so critical of the church authorities, we need to go very considerably further. i would say first of all that there should be no question but that until the church, as the deputy said, issued a clear and unequivocal statement that it will give precedence to civil law, the law of the state, on these matters, over canon law and concerns to defend its reputation and any other self-interest it may have. the papal nuncio should be expelled from this country. i would also say that the church and the state should be

forced into some sort of truth and reconciliation forum where the victims of abuse by the church and other institutions in this space should be given the opportunity to confront the authority of the institutions as it -- that abused them and have their own voices heard and their own demands about what they need in terms of address articulated. i also want to say that the report, while much rightly criticisms were made of church authorities, i think the minister also needs to look at the issue of the failure of others to report complaints of abuse to the health board and the fact that in some cases, they were assessing whether priests, about whom complaints had been made, were an ongoing

risk to church. they have no qualification whatsoever to assess whether alleged abusers are an ongoing risk to church. that's a matter for others. guards are able to assess on a different criteria, whether legal positions can be taken, but when we talk about mandatory reporting, the key question is, to whom are we reporting and for what? and it's not -- reporting shouldn't just be to the guardee, though it should be to the guardee, but it also has to be the health authorities who are considering the interest of the child, not just in terms of whether we can take legal prosecution but on the best interest of the child and what measures need to be put in place to secure the best interests of the child. can i also say that much of

course has been agreed and most will suggest, much of the problems would not have occurred if the children first guidelines were in place and being fully implemented by all agencies and all bodies and respected by church institutions and everybody else and therefore i very much welcome the goth's commitment to put in place and give letters of force to the chern's first guidelines. but it's clear that those guidelines cannot be implemented fully and properly unless the resources are provided to do that. that goes way beyond the commitment to 250 social workers, there are all sorts of other support resources, staffing issues that need to be addressed and frankly in the situation where the public sector recruitment embargo is lower than staff numbers where it would be needed to fully

resource these areas, that has to be looked at. if the children come first, we have to put the r >> the road to the white house coverage continues tonight with three presidential candidate in iowa. you can see that tonight at 8:00. >> watch more video of the candidates. see what political reporters are saying. go to our website for campaign 2012. it helps to landscape the political landscape. it is all act c-span.org.

>> tonight, at 8:00, the communicator's looks at the challenges of securing the u.s. infrastructure system. guests include the director of the technology and public policy program and the director of the cyber security project at georgetown university. that is at 8:00 eastern. you can see booktv in prime time all this week. starting at 8:30, henry kissinger. at 10:40, microsoft founder paul allen on his recent book.

earlier today, president obama nominated alan krueger to be the chairman of the white house council for economic advisers. >> good morning, everybody. this morning, we are canoeing -- continuing to deal with the aftermath of hurricane irene. we will make sure that folks have all the support they need as they begin to assess and repair the damage left by the storm. that is going to continue in the days ahead. it will take time to recover from the storm of this magnitude, the effects are being felt across much of the country,

including in new england. our response continues, but i will make sure that fema and other agencies are doing everything in their power to help people on the ground. even as we deal with this crisis of the moment, our great ongoing challenge as a nation remains how to get this economy growing faster. our challenge is to create a climate for more businesses can post job listings, where folks can find work, where families can regain a sense of economic security. that is our urgent mission. that is what i am fighting for every single day. that is why today, i am very pleased to nominate alan krueger to chair the council of economic advisers. he brings a wealth of experience to the job. he is one of the nation's leading economists.

for more than two cape -- for more than two decades, he studied and developed economic policy. in the first two years of its administration, as we were dealing with the effects of a complex financial crisis, a crisis that threatened to a second great depression, his experience proved invaluable. i am very pleased to point him and i look forward to working with him. it is going to be tough to fill the shoes of austan goolsbee. i have nothing but confidence as he takes on this important role as one of the leaders of my economic team. i rely on the council of economic advisers to provide unvarnished analysis and recommendations, not based on politics, not based on narrow interest, but based on the best evidence, based on what is going to do the most good for the most

people in this country. that is more important than ever right now. when the folks in washington to make decisions based on what is best for the country. not what is best for any political party or special- interest. that is not how we will get through this period of economic uncertainty. i will be calling upon -- next week, i will be laying out a series of steps that congress can take immediately to put more money in the pockets of working families, middle-class families, to make it easier for small businesses to hire people. construction crews to work rebuilding our nation's roads and airports. all the other measures that can help grow the economy. these are bipartisan ideas.

my hope and expectation is that the conflict country before party and get something done for the american people -- that we can put country before party and did something done for the american people. i appreciate your willingness to take on this assignment and i look forward to working with you once again. >> thank you very much. >> thank you, everybody. >> here is what the associated press is writing about this announcement. in nominating alan krueger, president obama gained an economist with expertise on employment. he is a former treasury department official and princeton university economist. more from the white house would

today's briefing would press secretary. he was joined by fema administrator on response to hurricane i've been. -- irene. >> welcome to the white house, everyone. this is your daily briefing. for those of you who were at martha's vineyard last week or on vacation, welcome back. that includes me. for those of you who were here, my condolences. before i get started on taking questions on other issues, i have with me today the administrator of the federal emergency management agency, craig fugate. as you know, mr. fugate has extensive emergency management experience. he was the former director of the florida division of emergency management, appointed to that position in 2001 by then

governor jeb bush, and then later reappointed by governor bush's successor, charlie crist. he held that position until president obama asked him to lead fema. he is here to take your questions and give you an update on hurricane irene and its consequences. fugatedon't we have mr. make a few points, take your questions on all issues related to irene, and then i will take your questions on other issues. thanks very much. >> well, good afternoon. i think first, our condolences for the families who have lost loved ones. unfortunately, irene was a deadly storm. reports are still coming in -- i think open source -- we've seen in the media about 21. we also know that there are several people still missing. and one of the things about these types of storms we know, unfortunately, the death toll may continue to go up in the recovery phase through accidents and other things that happen. it's been my experience from florida where, again, as we urge people to use common sense and be cautious -- don't drive through flooded areas.

we've got a lot of power lines down, and as crews are reenergizing, again, be very careful. we don't want any more people to lose their lives. but to the families that have lost ones, our condolences and our prayers are with them. tropical storm irene dissipated and moved into canada, but in its path as a hurricane we started out in the virgin isles and puerto rico, which most of the damages were in puerto rico. the president has declared puerto rico a major disaster area. we are providing assistance there. and then our attentions turned to the carolinas as the storm began moving towards the east coast. prior to the arrival of hurricane irene we had what we call an incident management team -- these are federal employees of fema that are trained to go in, link up with the state prior to the storm getting there so that we are prepared to support them both in the preparation phase but also in the immediate response phase -- 18 of those teams deployed across the east coast, as far south as florida all the way up to maine. and again, as we saw the track of the storm adjust we

repositioned teams and we became increasingly concerned about possible impacts in the new england states. we put liaisons into those states as the storm moved north. we pre-positioned water, food, generators, tarps and other supplies in incident staging bases based along the path of the storm. we were sitting, ready to activate our urban search and rescue teams. we put our teams on alert. three of those teams have actually been now activated, on standby and support in new york and in vermont, based upon the flooding there. but again, a lot of the rescue operations are being conducted by state and local officials -- national guard, men and women that were called out by their governors, coast guard and other rescue officials in those areas. as it stands now, we are still supporting in north carolina requests for assistance as they go to the recovery phase and begin damage assessments -- a lot of power outages, roads that were heavily damaged by storm surge, particularly in the outer banks, as well as a lot of debris in the eastern part of the state. as you move up the coastline, i'm sure you're all aware of the large numbers of power outages.

those numbers have come down since yesterday. the department of energy is working with the private sector as they track those numbers. but we went from over 6 million down to 5 million. and again, those numbers look to continue to come down, but some areas are going to have some time to get all the power back up. probably the real story was as irene was exiting and many people were focused along the coast we did get some impacts of coastal storm surge but not to the degree that we were concerned about. but heavy rain did occur along the interior parts of the path. that was a big concern we had as the storm moved north, and so we have seen record flooding in vermont, record flooding in new york. we still have rivers that have yet to crest. the river forecast center for the northeast was reporting that some of these rivers may not crest for two to three days. so the extent of impacts we still won't know, but, again, many of these areas have been dealing with very dangerous flooding. some of it has resulted in the loss of life. to give you some idea of how fast this occurred, the rivers

and the flooding were so intense that the vermont emergency operations center, their state emergency operations center, had to evacuate last night and relocate. we had already been working disasters in vermont, so we had a joint field office that they were able to relocate to, and so they were able to continue their operations after moving. but they did experience these damages and they are working to get their center back up. but, again, from a storm that i think -- a lot of folks on the coastal areas also showed that inland the heavy rains produced quite a bit of damages and are continuing to produce damages. so we're working with the governors now as they begin the assessment. the question i've been getting a lot is how much damage. we don't know; we're still assessing. a lot of the states are just finishing the response operations -- are beginning that, particularly the further south you are, as you move north. but in vermont and in new york, they're very actively still engaged in response operations, as well as massachusetts and new jersey -- which are also

experiencing flooding -- new hampshire and maine. so with that i'm open for questions. >> do you have any figures to attach to the damage yet, any idea how much the storm will cost? >> no, and i don't really estimate -- i don't like to give estimates, because one of the things you're looking at is a lot of power outages. you see a lot of damages that are not going to be covered by federal dollars -- we don't cover insurance losses. so some of the numbers you'll get from, like, insurance industry projects are actually what their exposure will be. those won't translate into what the federal cost will be. so this will be -- we do formal damage assessments with the states. we go in and look at those things that would be the responsibility of state and local government. we look at those damages. we look primarily at the uninsured losses. so until we actually get out there and do the damage assessments, we won't have numbers. but also understand that's not the total dollar figure. so you'll get lots of impacts. you're also going to have significant agricultural impacts in north caroline and other states. and so usda will be working with the state ag commissioners as they compile those costs. so the total dollar figure is

actually from several different sources. what we will report will be the damages that will be eligible if there was a presidential disaster declaration for major reimbursement assistance. >> what's the total number without power? >> the total number -- and, again, this number is fluctuating and it's coming down, but the department of energy at our 12:30 p.m. conference call was reporting a little over 5 million. and that number had come down from a number that was a little over 6 million. but department of energy is tracking that very closely, working with the states and utilities, and putting that number together as it changes through the days. >> did vermont take you by surprise completely? and i didn't hear any warnings about vermont. >> no, we knew they were in the area of heavy rainfall. and this is one thing that director bill reed was trying to get people not to focus just on the center of circulation or on the coast. the heavy rainfall -- particularly this storm had a lot of rain ahead of it as it was moving ashore -- the concern was where we could expect rainfall. in fact, if you went back to the hydromet prediction center, they were putting out forecasts of these types of measures that we could see as far as rainfall,

so it was something we were expecting. but the reality is with flash flooding, much of this occurred very quickly. in fact, in many of these rivers in vermont, they've already gone back down. it was just a very quick response rate from the rain, the flooding, and now we're looking at the damages. >> what happened in [inaudible] new york? >> just -- i don't have anything specific right now. >> given that this is the anniversary of hurricane katrina and you've talked about some of the lessons of hurricane katrina, can you speak specifically about what was learned then that helped you and the federal government to be better prepared for hurricane irene? >> well, you got to give credit to congress who, one, passed the post-katrina emergency management reform act that clarified and gave clarity to fema's mission, but also cleared up some issues that were considered issues. should we wait till a governor has exceeded all of their resources to then ask for federal assistance, and at that point do we respond?

or are we able to get things going earlier, not wait for that declaration without waiting for the state to be overwhelmed to get ready? and this is i think -- one of the keys we've learned is when we know there's a disaster that could occur -- and again, we're working off that forecast -- is not to wait until the state says we're going to need help. part of it is by getting our teams into those states with the counterparts of the governor's team working early. not only are we there in case they need our help, we have a better idea of what to anticipate and we have built that team so if we do have the impact, we can right to work. that, as well as the ability to pre-position resources, move them into areas before the states make formal requests. a lot of this was the mechanics that we learned from katrina. but i think some of the other things that was directed into legislation was we needed to look beyond just what fema's role is; that we're not the team, we're part of a team. we really had to look at things such as how do you better integrate the volunteers and the ngos and their capabilities, as well as the private sector.

i mean, i was in florida doing a lot of hurricanes. and quite honestly, when you get to the point where you find yourself setting up distribution points in the parking lot of an open grocery store because they brought a generator in, brought in emergency crews and got their store open, but you weren't talking, i could have probably gone where there was a greater need. so right now one of the things we've done in this administration is we brought the private sector into fema's headquarters. we have a representative on a rotating basis in the private sector representing them, so we work as a team. and so right now we're getting reports of stores opening -- first in puerto rico, when the initial storm hit, looking at big block stores that were able to get open -- had a better sense that a lot of the things that we were concerned about, the private sector was able to get up and running, so we could focus on the areas that were flooded, mainly smaller towns and communities in the more mountainous areas of puerto rico. >> it was six years ago today when katrina came ashore. fema's reputation was not enhanced by the operation there. is there one single lesson from katrina that has kind of reshaped fema and their response to this?

>> we can't wait to know how bad it is before we get ready. we have to go fast. we have to base it upon the potential impacts. that's why we look at these forecasts we get from the hurricane center and we make the decisions based upon what the potential impacts could be. if you wait till you know how bad it is, it becomes harder to change the outcome. >> and how good was the forecast? did you expect hurricane irene to be what she turned out to be? was the forecasting good enough? >> the track of the forecast, i think they've looked back and the national hurricane center will give you that update of what they saw, but i think the track was only about 10 miles off of where they actually thought it was going to come ashore. but the intensity of the wind speed -- but that's something -- i'm going to be honest with you folks. of all the things we know about hurricanes, the track forecast, we have the greatest -- we've seen the science has really improve that in my career to where if this had been 10 to 15 years ago, florida would have had to evacuate based upon this track.

you remember seeing the satellite how big that storm was and how close it was to the state of florida? we would not have been able to not evacuate. but the science is that good on track. but where we know where we still have a lot of work to do is intensity forecasts -- what goes up and goes down. remember hurricane charlie in florida? it went from a category one in cuba, crossing over, became a category four in less than 24 hours. we've seen a lot of these storms that the smaller storms, rapid anticipation. we also see storms that weaken. and that is an area that -- that skill we still need to work on. but based on the forecast, that's what we prepare for. >> looking at the current scenario, does vermont need more federal resources? >> again, the response phase -- and we were talking to -- we have a conference call each day with all the state directors that are impacted. the state director reported they have what they need. they're beginning to look at their damage assessments, and it is likely we'll be doing damage assessments with them to determine if they're going to

need more assistance to recover. but in the response phase, they advised us they had what they needed, and they appreciate the fact that we had resources standing by. >> administrator fugate, since you worked katrina six years ago and this hurricane, what did you personally see the differences? has the red tape actually been cutting up where you felt easier to be able to maneuver to get assistance to people this hurricane versus katrina? >> you talk about the processes and a lot of mechanics behind it. i think in this administration, from my earliest events when i came onboard -- america samoa, supporting usaid haiti, the floods in tennessee, and obviously this year -- the one thing that's been impressed upon me by the president is we go as a federal team and we bring all our resources together. i think there is a lot of things that when we do it as a team and we understand that you cannot have separate -- you can't look at local government, state government, federal government, the volunteers and the private sector as distinct entities and be successful.

you got to look as a team. and so one of the things that's been impressed upon me and the thing that we've learned and try to practice here is we're not the team, we're part of the team. we have to bring all of our resources together. we have to work as a team. we have to be focused on the survivors, and the emphasis on speed -- to get there, get stabilized, to figure out what the next steps are without waiting to ask all the questions, well, how bad is it, what do you need? we know generally in these types of events what most likely is going to be required. let's get moving it. if we don't need it, we can turn it off. but you don't get time back in a disaster. look at what was happening at katrina in the first 72 hours, that once you got past that point, there was not much more you could do to change that outcome, and then things were just cascading one on top of the other. >> so would you say that six years ago people weren't working as a team? >> i think there was a lot of things at the federal level that congress addressed in the post- katrina emergency management reform act that has certainly

made my job easier to work in that team environment. >> do you have an exact figure on the amount that's left in the disaster relief fund? >> no, not today. i think earlier in the week we had gone below a billion dollars and were around $900 million. and i'm not sure what today's figure is. but that's one of the reasons why we implemented immediate needs funding, was to preserve funding for the existing disaster. this is one thing i want to make clear. we said we went to immediate needs funding, and a lot of people thought, well, the people that had been impacted by the tornados and floods, we're going to take that money away from them. the survivors that are eligible for assistance are still getting funds. individual assistance programs were not affected by this, nor was any protective measures, or any debris clearance or any project that had already been approved. the only thing that we have postponed is new projects that are permanent work that had not been started when we go into immediate needs funding. and that is to ensure that we still have funds to do this response, continue to meet the needs of the survivors of the previous disasters, while supporting the initial response to hurricane irene. >> so the criticism from

congressman blunt out of missouri is inaccurate? >> well, again, for the individuals that were helping, for the cleanup, and for the emergency costs, we're continuing that. but for any projects that have not come in for approval, we're not going to be able to fund those as this point. we're going to postpone those. they're still eligible, but we won't be able to start new permanent work such as permanent construction repairing damages from those tornados. >> if i can follow up on the money question. i mean, we've had the earthquake, we had the tornados, now we've got this hurricane. is there any risk -- do you have a bottomless pool of money for state assistance? or do you run out? >> well, that's one of the things we've been working on, and that's why we went to immediate needs funding. there was too much unknown about irene, and looking at how many states were going to be impacted, we knew and we had actually -- knew that going into our end of the fiscal year, we were going to get close to the point where we would have to look at immediate needs funding at some point. our goal was to continue to be able to respond to the open

disasters and maintain enough reserves for any new disasters until we get into the next fiscal year. but irene was obviously something -- we felt it was just prudent. we weren't out of money, but we wanted to make sure we had enough money available to continue supporting the survivors from the past disasters, as well as start the response to irene. >> your goal was a billion, and then after that, you're done? >> no, we actually had more money earlier this year. we also had -- the disaster relief fund is something that's an appropriation that we get. it's also something that because of older disasters we close out, we put money back in. but it is -- we generally look at that -- when we get down to about a billion dollars, we want to make sure that we can continue supporting the survivors for all the old disasters, as well as any new responses. going into september being the peak part of hurricane season, and with irene, we didn't want to get to the point where we would not have the funds to continue to support the previous impacted survivors as well as respond to the next disaster.

>> okay. thank you all very much. administrator fugate, we appreciate it. thank you. now, let's go to other issues. >> can you talk about alan krueger's appointment today? he's a previous member of the administration who seems to be viewed as a continuity pick. does that suggest that the president likes how his economic team is composed and doesn't see the need to shake it up? >> i think he picked dr. krueger because he's an excellent economist whose particular skills are more relevant than ever in the economic environment we find ourselves in. he brings a lot of experience to the table both as an academic and through his service in the treasury department of this administration, the labor department of the clinton administration. his expertise in the labor market is particularly relevant as we focus on the need to grow the economy and increase job

creation. so he looked for the best possible choice and found him in dr. krueger. >> do you believe that he'll bring new ideas to the table? >> i believe that he's an excellent economist and a dynamic economist with a lot of experience, and will be an important member of the economic team, yes. >> and on the president's job speech, he shared with us that it will be next week. what day is it going to be? >> we don't have a date to announce. i will repeat what the president said, that you can expect it next week, but i don't have a date or location to give to you today. >> what is the reason for not telling us when it's going to be? >> it could be because we haven't finally decided. [laughter.] and when we have an announcement to make, we'll make it. that would be the -- >> heated debate? >> no debate, just figuring out the best time for it, best location. >> so you don't know when or where it's going to be at this point?

>> actually, the decision has not been finally made. >> thank you. >> yes. >> jay, does the white house have any more information or ideas about where gaddafi is? >> no, we have no indication that he has left libya. we are obviously working with the tnc and with our nato partners on that. but if we have -- if we knew where he was, we would pass that information along to the opposition forces. >> will the white house and will the united states government ask the rebels to hand over the lockerbie bomber? >> extradition issues are something you should address to the department of justice. i think that he was tried in scotland, not here. but we are monitoring that situation, as well. >> on the scope of the jobs package, is this something that the white house thinks can have sweeping change on the employment picture in the united states?

>> the president will propose, as he has said in the past, initiatives that will have a direct impact on economic growth and job creation -- substantial impact -- as measured by middle-of-the-road, unaffiliated, nonpartisan economists. they will be measures that should have bipartisan support and that he expects will have bipartisan support, because everyone's focus in washington, whether you're a member a of congress or a member of this administration, ought to be on getting this economy moving faster and the need to hire more people faster. so it will have a measurable impact. and if the entirety of his proposals were passed by congress and signed into law, that impact would be very beneficial to the economy and to employment.

>> given that emphasis on the bipartisan nature of these proposals, has he consulted with republican members of congress as they develop these ideas? >> i don't have specific conversations or meetings to read out to you. the president has consulted widely, beyond the administration. he has spoken to you about a number of specific ideas that he has that you can assume will be part of this that would have a direct impact on job creation and economic growth. but there will be other ideas that will be new to you as part of this package. >> and finally, given the administration's statements lately about the intransigence of republicans in congress, is this in any way a measure that the white house expects to be dead on arrival and is essentially a political package? >> i don't because -- it's not a political package because it is actually the precisely opposite of it. ofre talking about september 2011, more than a year before the next election. this package will be focused precisely on job creation and

economic growth. it will be made up of components that should have, based on historical experience, bipartisan support. and to the extent that politics is involved -- and we hope involved in a helpful way -- it will be in the sense of immediate urgency that members of congress have upon returning from their states and districts, having heard from their constituents the amount of frustration that is so palpable out in america with the partisan posturing and political bickering that's taking place here, that's getting in the way of -- obstructing our ability to do the things that the american people want us to get done. i mean, we saw this during the deficit and debt negotiations, the debt ceiling crisis. there's an enormous opportunity here to accomplish big things that the american people want accomplished and that could be done in a bipartisan way. and that includes job creation measures, economic growth measures, and fiscal soundness measures.

and our hope and expectation is that the members of congress from both parties will come back with a heightened sense of urgency to put the american people ahead of party, ahead of politics, and to do something right for the economy. >> when will the president go visit any of the areas that have been hit by the hurricane? >> ann, i don't have a scheduling announcement for you at this point. i don't have an announcement of that nature to make. >> and he put out a statement on katrina six years later. does he feel that the federal government is significantly better in its reaction now than it was six years ago? >> well, i think administrator fugate addressed that and addressed it from firsthand experience, and i think his answer was, yes, basically. >> but president obama, particularly -- does he feel that on his watch -- yesterday he said he took -- if you need something, tell me about it.

does he really think that the federal government is in a keener position? >> he thinks that >> he thinks that his administration has, from a one -- from day one, tried to be responsive to national disasters like hurricanes, floods, tornadoes, and that posture has been the right one to take. others will judge whether or not seen the's response, the federally -- the federal government's response has been adequate. the president is making sure all resources, all aspects of the federal family are focused on this, led by administered of aids. and again, his -- this assessment will be made -- led by administrative aides.

and again, this assessment will be made by others. the impact is still to be felt a lot of states and a lot of recovery is still to be done. >> the president has given at least half a dozen jobs speeches already this year. what do we expect out of this speech? >> you make a good point in that the focus on jobs has been unbroken in this administration from the moment the president was sworn into office. from the day that he is sworn into office, more than 700,000 jobs were lost the first month. the economy contracted, i believe, over 8% since the fourth quarter of 08. -- of 2008. there has been an incredible amount of shrinkage. we are constantly with looking

at ways to continue to grow the economy and create jobs. for a variety of reasons, the economy slowed and the experience had winds and they have not been chipping away at unemployment the way we need to be. the president feels very passionately that we need to make new measures, to ensure that jobs are created and the economy grows. this has been a consistent focus of the president. but the focus will not diminish at all in the coming months or years. >> his focus is unbroken on jobs, and yet the unemployment is up 25% since the president took office. what is his record in terms of fighting jobs? >> whittlesea what the president proposes to enhance growth.

but i cannot let the promise go on commented on -- gocommented on when you talk about -- go un commented on when you talk about job losses. i do not think anyone would argue that the 8 million jobs lost in this recession were lost because of the actions that this president appeared those jobs were lost in the months before his swearing in and of the month since the -- the month -- and in the months since his policies have been able to make an effect, jobs have been created. the economy has grown, albeit not in a pace-at a pace that

satisfies him or any of us in this administration. that record is indisputable. we inherited a terrible situation. a terrible economy, a terrible economy that threaten to become far worse without the actions that this administration took and congress in 2009. >> the president and you have made the case that he is helping this economy. when is he responsible for this economy? >> he is responsible every day for this economy. he is working directly with congress to make every measure possible to improve the economic situation in this country, to increase joe -- growth and job creation. what has to be clear when you freeze a question like that in the way that you did, it has to be clear that the situation that you -- that to the hole that we have been climbing out of as a country, democrats, republicans,

independents, we have all been climbing out of because of the recession this country has endured. he is on the job and responsible every day. and to go back to your first question, that is why he is coming forward in the coming days with new proposals to further job creation and economic growth. >> it appears the vfw is unhappy with the white house over the position of the deputy secretary with pensions. should they be? >> i am not aware of that. >> the national commander called it an insult of the highest magnitude. members are not getting a first tier speaker from the administration. >> the president has a speech tomorrow. i do not have any specific response to that.

but there's no political connection here because repair is also addressing the same subject. >> since we make scheduling decisions like this well in advance, no. >> even though dr. kurram has been a part of the administration, how -- dr. krueger has been a part of the administration, how confident are you in him? >> we think it is essential that congress act quickly to confirm dr. kruger, precisely because of the importance of the economy, the need to take measures to grow the economy and create jobs. we expect that congress will do that, and will act quickly. we are optimistic that his confirmation will be speedy. >> i noticed you did not hear from him today. you know how soon he will be available for interviews? >> as a matter of normal course,

nominees do not take questions from the press or give interviews during the process of their being nominated. the president today signaled his intent to nominate. i think the formal nomination takes place once congress is back. >> you talked about the president working on his job plan while he was at martha's vineyard. has he finished his jobs plan? >> he is still having conversations and meetings as he works to finalize his plan. the answer is, no, he is not complete with that process. the process continues. aspects of it still need to be decided. >> any chance he will be bringing on new members while he is working on this time of transition? >> not that i am aware of. it is a big administration, so i do not know. did you have somebody in mind?

>> it is he thinking about bringing on anyone knew? >> and he announced today a new member of his economic team. beyond that, i do not anticipate any announcements. >> according to the latest gallup poll, people who have a bought-a positive view of the government's -- people who have a positive view of the government is at 17%, an all- time low. >> i think that is a reflection of the frustration that people feel about the gridlock and the partisanship that they would is when they get attention to what is going on in washington. it is a frustration that the president understands. he talked about it recently in his trip to the upper midwest the week before last. that number send the message, or should send a message to everyone who is chosen by their constituents to represent them

here in washington to get things done, to do exactly what their kids to twins want them to do, which is to represent them and get things -- what their constituents want them to do, which is to represent them and get things done, we have one party in control of one house of congress and another in control of the other. the president is in the white house. the we need to work to get things done. there is certainly a lot of bickering and posturing when there is obviously a lot of things we can do to create jobs. that is what the president is focused on. that is what he will put forward, next week as he said. and he expects that as they come back from their recess, members of congress will feel that urgency as well. >> [unintelligible] has he requested any additional

funds for that? >> we are still in the process of getting a calculation for what the overall costs and damage is caused by hurricane irene and troubles from mulrine. it is hard to say until we know what the cost is -- tropical storm irene. it is hard to say until we know what the cost is. >> any idea what economic impact this is going to have? also, what impact is this going to have on the recovery? >> last week as we knew this storm was coming, we marshaled our resources and we dealt with that up the coast. our focus has been on two -- on the need to respond effectively. his concern has been on individual americans and the risk to them, their lives and

their property. as well as on the need to begin the process of recovery. i have not heard him express concern directly related to the cost overall. his primary focus has been on the emergency response and making sure that americans are safe. [unintelligible] >> i do not have a date. >> can you preview the speech tomorrow? >> i cannot. i have not read it yet. i do not have a preview for you. >> [unintelligible] >> i could, but i won't. >> what is the subject matter in general? >> i'm sure he will talk about issues they're relevant to the american region. -- that are relevant to the american region.

>> [unintelligible] >> i think there will be a large national security component to it. that is all i have for you. >> did the house action this summer coming in for pro-forma sessions, did it include any plans by the president to make any recess appointments? >> no. >> there is a word that there could be some rays in unemployment. -- some raise in unemployment. >> any economist worth his or her salt has written extensively on a number of issues, had different proposals, examined the different ideas. there is not a one or the other expressed by dr. krueger that the president is adopting over any other.

dr. kruger will be an important member of the economic team once he is confirmed. >> did the administration raise any ideas? orix i have not heard any -- >> i have not heard of anything either way. the president sets economic policy. he makes the decisions and he believes that dr. krueger will be an excellent member of the economic team. >> a question about irene, when the president was on his bus trip before the hurricane he was talking about government and politics. now that irene has happened, is he going to use the hurricane irene experience to bolster the role of government? >> i have not had that conversation with him. i do not know whether he will or not. i think his overall point, over

and above any natural disaster, i think the government does things that are important to the american people, whether disaster relief or keeping our country save through our military the -- safe through our military or various other services. will be focused on recovering from the storm, responding to the storm and then recovering. i cannot anticipate that at this point. eight $2.2 million federal grant aided efforts to undo same-sex marriage in one state. >> i am not aware of the legislation. >> [unintelligible] i think the use of federal money

is unacceptable. >> can you repeat that? >> [unintelligible] >> you are asking a harvard medical about an executive order. -- at a hypothetical about an executive order. >> in just one? >> something bernie sanders said, one of the reasons the president has moved so far to the ride is that there is no primary opposition to him -- to the right is that there is no primary opposition to him. my question is, why is it that hillary will not run against him? [applause] -- [laughter] >> you win the award for originality today. the president is not focused on an election today. he is trying to create jobs and ensure that americans in the

path of this hurricane are taking care of. >> i understand, by your running away from this question. can you guarantee that hillary is not going to run? >> he will have to ask her, but we are fairly confident that we need to focus on the task at hand. >> the package, can you say how much it might be worth? tens of billions of dollars, hundreds of millions? >> i do not have specifics for you that i will give you today. you have heard some of the proposed ideas that are likely to be part of this, and there are likely to be others that you have not heard. i do not have figures for you. i am not going to preempt the president by putting that forward. >> and his new nominee, can he have any role, or has he had any role in the jobs deliberation?

>> he has not had any role of to now. he has been at princeton university since he left the administration in the treasury department. it is my i understand in that he will not have a whirl until he is confirmed. i can check on that, but that is my anders standing. >> -- but that is my understanding. >> are there plans for american cities, like new orleans, that have challenges still? >> i think new orleans is a unique city. we are still dealing with things that happened because of hurricane katrina. i am not sure exactly what specifically your question goes to. i think it was an historically terrible hurricane with historic we disastrous aftereffects and that is how it is viewed by this

administration these many years after. >> also, we never got word about if this white house actually was shaking in fear over anything that happened. >> i did not get a phone call in the middle of the night about it. my understanding is, for those who were here -- i had friends here in washington, and you could definitely feel the earthquake here. there was an evacuation. assessments were made that everything was fine. people came back. >> did anything happen structurally? >> not that i am aware of. >> are those new glasses? >> they are. the better to see you with. [laughter] ?

>> i needed a new prescription, so i 3 in new trains as well. -- i threw in a new frames as well. they are stylishly nerdy. [laughter] >> within a couple of minutes of the president's announcement this morning, the rnc was putting out talking points, pretty much saying that the liberals were leaning toward lenin. i was wondering, why would you think the republicans in the senate would want to confirm? >> i reason might be the assessment of the former council adviser under president bush, man q, he said that krueger is

an excellent choice. greg mancue, who said that krueger is an excellent choice. another who endorsed it was someone from the reagan administration. he is an excellent economist, an experienced one, whose background is particularly suited to the current economic environment. and his advice will be very welcome. thanks very much. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> c-span's road to the white house coverage continues tonight with three republican presidential candidates in iowa. over the weekend, texas gov. rick perry and congressman ron

paul and thaddeus macarthur -- mccotter attended a picnic. also on c-span [applause] at 8:00 p.m. -- also on c-span2 at 8:00 p.m., a look at cyber security. now i look at prescription drugs and incentives to increase production. from this morning's "washington journal" this is about 40 minutes. thank you for coming in. you reported a story recently about the u.s. scrambling to ease a shortage of vital madison among those -- vital medicine. what kind of drugs? guest: drugs that are vital for cancer patients.

there is a crucial drug for leukemia patients. a lot of the regimens important for childhood leukemia, that can cure childhood leukemia, vital to the whole disease are now in short supply. the same thing with colon cancer. there is an older drug for breast cancer, which you might remember was a drug that was made from yew trees. it was originally in short supply because there were few of the trees. it began synthesized -- became a synthesized. it is also in short supply. when you undergo an operation, there are some antibiotics -- there are now more than 180

drugs in short supply. host: you interviewed some patients who are not getting the drugs that they need. you profiled one patient, 47, north carolina. she has breast cancer and she is worried that she might not be able to get taxol, which is in short supply. how life-threatening are these shortages for patients? guest: they are life- threatening. there are all sorts of patients who have to switch. cancer is a disease where there have been decades of research trying to come up with precisely the right regiment that leads to the best outcomes.

there are some drugs that you can sort of substitute, but they are not guaranteed to give you that outcomes that the precise regimen does. a lot of doctors are having to adjust on the fly and hope that the regimen they come up with can be as effective, but there are no guarantees. earlier in the midst of a terrible disease like cancer -- when you are in the midst of a terrible disease like cancer, the last thing you want is to worry about whether the drug regimen you are taking is not going to be there or to extend out your chemotherapy treatment. instead of going for a terrible four weeks in which you lose your hair and have terrible side effects, sometimes these people have to go five or six weeks. it makes their lives that much

more complicated. host: looking at pictures from "the new york times." where is this shortage coming from? guest: there is no simple answer. there are about five different reasons for this. the main reason for this is that there has been consolidation in the generic drug industry over the last 10 years. instead of having dozens of mom- and-pop, small, generic drug companies with small manufacturing facilities, there are now fewer than a handful of multinational, multibillion- dollar corporations. they have consolidated a lot of their operations in massive facilities. many of them make hundreds and hundreds of drugs. they are constantly juggling both facilities and medicines. every year, there are more drugs that are approved. there are more than 4000 job --

drugs that are approved. every year, shortages have been with us. when you have more than 4000 drugs in need, there will always be some of them that, for one reason or another, are in short supply. these shortages are getting worse because many of these companies are so massive and they're going to places increasingly -- going to places, increasingly, like india and china. india and china are not inspected by the fda. increasingly, there are problems with supplies, particularly for some of these adjustable medicines, which are very risky if they are not manufactured correctly. you can die very fast if there is a contamination to an injectable medicine. when you factor in these drugs, the fda rapidly shots down

facilities. now they are producing hundreds of drugs in one facility. if a facility gets shut down, dozens, if not hundreds, of drugs can go in short supply. host: if you want to join the conversation, here are the numbers to call. republicans -- (202)624-1115. democrats -- (202)624-1111. independents -- (202)624-0760. let's go to william on our independent line. caller: good morning. thank you for accepting my call. host: you bet. caller:, to of it is that the fda is tightening or changing -- caller: how much of it is that the fda is tightening or changing standards? the manufacturers are saying the cost to comply with some of these rules are excessive.

they are either stopping production. in some cases, in contact lens, they have literally stopped making the product. guest: it is interesting that this conversation is a continuation of the conversation that preceded me with david arkush. it is true. i think there has been broad agreement that the fda has gradually stepped up its standards. everybody pretty much agrees in the industry that those standards need to be high, particularly with these sorts of medicines, injectables. if there is contamination, you can die extremely rapidly. there is broad agreement among everybody involved, including industry, the fda needs to have high standards and to actually enforce those standards in a

much tougher way. the fda never in specs plants in china and india. they have become crucial to our nation's drug supply. the plant in china and india can go more than 50 years without an inspection. many of these plans have never been inspected. it would take the fda 13 years, at present rate, to inspect all foreign drug plants. the industry believes that it is so vital that the fda get to these plans more often for safety reasons that the industry, in the midst of agreeing to give the fda $300 million annually, a problem% of its revenue -- about 1% of its revenue. everybody believes government is the answer. everybody involved, including industry, wants to actually pay for greater government participation in that answer. host: gardiner harris.

one of his sources in a recent story points out the number of cancer patients diagnosed in a year is relatively easy to predict. here is what our guest wrote. guest: again, this is an issue where -- we can talk about safe food and some other things. everybody involved in food, including manufacturers and consumers -- everyone agrees that the fda needs to do a better job of ensuring that the food supply, the foods that we give our children are safe.

everybody involved, including industry, wants to give the fda more money. in fact, the industry wants to be taxed to make this food safer. the same thing is true minister of supply issue -- true in this drug supply issue. some of these drugs are going in short supply because the private market incentives are not there. when the drugs are in short supply, the prices go up, sometimes 20 fold. people are coming up with the idea that the government put aside a year's worth of supplies of these crucial medicines. the cdc has a stockpile of critical medicines. these are the kinds of medicines like antibiotics, and a virus, and denim products -- antivirals, antivenom products.

there is a question as to whether the national stockpile should be expanded to include some of these medicines for chronic diseases. they are vital for the health and well-being of people in this country. host: shortages by year -- in 2001, there were -- and at this point, we're already in the 180-market. .et's go to hawaii guest: aloha. i want to thank you for being extremely knowledgeable. diana ceo of one of -- i am as ceo of one of the rapid-growing pharmacology companies.

everyone of us inside the business really knows what is going on. manufacturers of generic drugs -- manufacturing and generic drug is simple -- manufacturing a generic drug is simple. we saw an increase, in the last 50 days, in the primary drugs by six and a%, as reflected in a recent new york times " -- we saw an increase, in the last 50 days, in the primary drug shortage of -- costs by 600%, as reflected in a recent "new york times" article.

taxol could become unavailable. cancerusa.org is moving forward with a three-pronged strategy. they are trying to get cancer medicine to those who cannot afford the medicines. they are trying to implement some traditional, managerial methodologies that we all use in business to improve our operational efficiencies. the biggest problem -- the total problem is that they deliberately cut back the primary manufacturers -- the primary manufacturers deliberately cut back on the production of these drugs so that they can see an increase the price and force people to have no alternative but to go out and buy these things that

extend a person's life by just a few months. they just extend the missouri. host: let's get a response. thank you for talking about your own personal experience. let's talk about the last thing you mentioned -- this idea of manufacturers being able to raise the price by holding supply. where is the incentive to keep the market flooded with drugs? the market goes up and they become more valuable when there are less of them available. guest: it is tempting to think there is a conspiracy going on. it is true that, some of these older medicines, when they go in short supply, doctors turned to far more expensive drugs. 20 times, 100 times more expensive. we are seeing this conspiracy to spend a lot of money. the cancer drugs are not

sustainable. the new entry price for cancer medicines is about $100,000. it was $60,000 four years ago. in three or four years, it will be $150,000. there are a number of drugs that have come out recently. if you go through the gamut, you will spend $500,000 and extend your life by only a few months. what is going on with cancer drugs is entirely unsustainable. these shortages are not part of a conspiracy to move people to these more expensive medicines. companies making the less- expensive medicines are very different from the companies making the more-expensive medicines. it is some real disconnects in the system for supplying medicine. one of the issues -- we should all be concerned that our health

care system is now entirely dependent on china. 80% of the active pharmaceutical ingredients in all the medicines that we take now come mostly from chinese and indian plants. china and india basically supply nearly all of the crucial medicines that we rely on. we do not make, in this country, antibiotics, any more. we do not make many of the anesthesia drugs that you absolutely have to have if you are going to have the surgery. we do not make any more of the hormonal drugs that you absolutely have to have. they are nearly all made in china. if we ever got into a situation which china where they closed their borders to drug imports, our health care system would come to a crashing halt relatively quickly. it is a very strange situation. the last and democratic plant

was a bristol-myers -- to last and idiotic plant in the united states was a bristol-myers -- plant inantibiotic the united states was a bristol- myers plant. aspirin -- there is a small plant that doesn't even supply all of bayer's needs. if you take the men's -- take vitamins -- they are supplied by china. from a strategic perspective, we're getting all of our medicines and vitamins, particularly over-the-counter medicines from china and india. many of these plans are simply not being inspected. cot,: nadine in press go

arizona. caller: thank you. i want to note there is a list of medications on the web site -- i want to know if there is a list of medications on the web site -- a website. guest: yes. the fda -- host: we have it here. they list the current drug shortages. they should the manufacturer, why it is delayed, and related information about when the drug might be coming out, and who else to check with you find an inventory. guest: there is a university with a large list of medicines even slightly in short supply. go to the university of utah web sites -- website and type in "shortage." host: looking at the top ones on

the fda. it shows the company and products. hospira -- out of a drug because there was higher-than- anticipated demand. it is an installation -- inhalation solution. we see increasing demand, higher-than-expected demand as reasons. guest: hospira is one. a manufacturer will suddenly and unexpectedly dropped out. the manufacturers cannot make up for the volume needed. the largest generic drug company in the world right now is teva pharmaceuticals. we want to build a very large plants -- they want to build a

very large plants in california. they were making dozens of products in the california plant. products went in short supply. other manufacturers could not make up for the shortfall. a lot of the drugs that are vitally needed are in short supply because teva cannot come out with them. host: akron, ohio, mike, republican. good morning. caller: good morning. if you have heard of cannabinoids, your body tries to make cannabinoids to fight off cancer. they are naturally found in the oil of marijuana, of hemp plants. anybody with cancer should research this. pharmaceutical companies are going to start trying to

isolate the cannabinoids and release it. people can create it on their own, by making and oil out of this simple -- an oil out of this simple plant. guest: you're on the republican line? oddly enough, cannabinoids are a hot area of research. there is a wasting-away disease where you throw up a lot. there is a lot of research around solving that problem of nausea in cancer. also, there is a very big investigation of cannabinoids in fat. there is a big fat pill that was made by sanofi-aventis.

theypeople smoke pot, get the munchies. sanofi-aventis came up with a cannabinoid-blocker to block the abidine that comes with smoking -- appetite that comes with smoking pot. the fda found there were other side effects. the cannabinoid area of research is a very hot one. there are dozens of different cannabinoids. the work continues on them. host: on twitter -- guest: one of the reasons why

writing about health care is so interesting is that it is one of those areas where the profit incentives and lives often come head-to-head. and so, i've covered the pharmaceutical industry for more than a dozen years. i have written dozens of stories about drug makers putting their own profits ahead of people's lives. that continues to this day in certain parts of the health care sector. of course, there are plenty of other stories about -- this is not just pharmaceutical companies that do this. hospitals will do this. doctors will do this. they will do procedures on patients, even when those procedures are not effective for helpful, because it makes them money -- not effective or helpful, because it makes

them money. we have a health care system where we are trying to use private incentives to make it more efficient. patients are seen as profit centers. patients can be harmed as a result. "the: gardiner harris with the new york times." his beat covers public health. he talked about vaccines cleared against autism. his reporting in kentucky included black-lung composition and -- compensation eand earned awards. good morning. caller: thank you for your time

this morning and your excellent research. i am a person with parkinson's disease. you're probably well aware that teva plays a rather critical role in the supply of things like medications for people with parkinson's disease. i fully advocate a holistic approach, but, without taking these medications every two hours and 40 minutes, i cannot even think of what would result. can you comment on that? your situation demonstrates why something needs to be done. there are a lot of people out there who survived only because there are medicines that keep them alive -- survive only

because there are medicines that keep them alive. there are a lot of effort on top of the hill to deuce and then about this. the very idea that these medicines might not be there ourn people need them, in y ou instance every 2 1/2 hours -- when congress comes back in session, i think you'll see a lot of effort and talk about what can be done to make sure these medicines are here. this is not just the day-to-day issue of making sure manufacturing goes according to plan. people are worried about the strategic issue. we depend entirely, as i said before, on china and india. our relationship continuing and doing well with those countries.

for us to get those vital ingredients for those medicines. a lot of people have started to wake up to the fact that that is worrisome. host: here in washington, d.c., mark on the republican line. caller: there was an fda report about the majority of ingredients in the are drugs coming from china and india -- in our drugs coming from china. guest: right. caller: i was wondering if you could comment about the implications for the whole pharmacy, pounding industry -- pharmacy compounding industry. guest: are you talking about the pharmacy compounding in the united states using these ingredients? caller: exactly.

we have the stuff from china that we do not know where it is coming from. guest: are you worried about three importation or the -- about reimportation or the compounding? caller: the concerns have been raised moron the latter -- more on the latter. you don't have the good manufacturing process that the generics or branded products have. guest: the drug industry is stood up in its various components. the largest is the generic drug industry. they make 75% of all prescription drugs that you and i take. the smaller part of the industry, although it takes the vast majority of the money -- we spend 10% of the generics.

we get 75% of the volume in that part of the industry. a little under 90% of the money goes to the branded drugs, the drugs advertised on evening news shows. about 23% or 24% of the prescriptions go there. there is a tiny slice put together by small pharmacies, some very large pharmacies, that are quasi-manufacturing facilities themselves. they are supposed to compound medications for specific patients themselves. there are some drugs they compound in large beatches, --

batches, which makes fda very nervous. there are constant problems with these batch-processed pharmacy compounds. there are a number of deaths attributed to them. host: there is a report on msnbc.com. the price they're willing to pay shows that their average market was -- markup was 650%. they will go to whatever lengths

they can to get it. guest: the drug industry is simple, until you get into these situations, and then it gets very complicated. they hand off the drugs to distributors. are two large distribution companies -- there are two large distribution companies. the trucks bring the drugs to facilities, and then they distribute them around the country. there are pilot fish to the big sharks, and their business is arbitraging little shortage situations. they try to figure out ahead of

time what drugs might be in short supply and they buy a whole bunch of them. or they buy ahead of price increases. they are the day traders of the pharmaceutical industry. sometimes, they can cause a shortage situation. rumors might go out about a drug in short supply. the date traders buy -- day traders buy up supply. sure enough, there is a shortage. if you go to any hospital, you will see dozens of faxed offers from these companies.

we will charge you a lot more, but at least you'll get it. host: the gray market isn't illegal? guest: it is becoming less legal. there have been a number of laws put in place to be sure that drugs are coming from the appropriate place. as long as gray-market suppliers have clear -- can clearly show that they got this from inappropriate place, then it is legal -- an appropriate place, then it is legal. oftentimes, they do real preparation and buy -- re- appropriation and buy from europe, then resell it. that's illegal. host: as long as the provenance

-- guest: as long as they have the opera every province -- appropriate provenance, it is legal. sometimes provenance is not as legal as it is made out to be. host: charlene. caller: i take a complete replacement thyroid. it is much better than the synthetic. it is getting hard to get supplied. the industry is more corporatized. there are a lot of pigs being processed into foods. there are still lots of thyroids. i do not know why it is getting

more expensive. my mother was an rn. i have been in contact with world war ii rn's my whole life. a couple of them have said that we should go back to the drugs from then. they did better. that was the feedback i got. i watched my mother and many other people go through the end of their lives in the hospital, be over-medicated. i am personally not sure, if i get diagnosed with cancer, if i would go to the hospital. i don't know what i'll do. i keep seeing more and more money. host: let's get a response. guest: there was a lot. 3/4 of medicines come from a

plant source or were discovered from a plant source. most of them eventually move to and synthetic manufactured -- a synthetic manufacturer. plant sources, while wonderful, can be in short supply. the quality can vary from batch to batch when you rely on natural supply. taxol is a classic example of a drug discovered from the pacific yew tree and there was a process that the national cancer institute went through, testing natural product after natural product against cancer receptors. stumbling on to the pacific yew

tree. when bristol-myers figured out a synthetic way of making taxol, it was a huge breakthrough. taxol had been fairly expensive and in short supply. i think we aren't going back on this. as to what you do at the end of your life, that is a huge question that we all need to answer read some point. host: she brought up -- have you reported on that? guest: sure. united states does not handle death well. most people who go through cancer treatment continue to have chemotherapeutics in their bloodstream till the end. elizabeth edwards was the best cancer advocate. she knew about this.

as i read the coverage, she was using some very toxic drugs until a day or two before she died. there are some very large cancer hospitals in this country. if you look at the average amount of time that cancer patients at those hospitals spend in palliative care -- where they understand they are going to die and they are just trying to be comfortable at the end -- for some of these places, the average amount of time is less than one day, even though there is very good research that basically shows, if you are in palliative care, you will live longer. host: gardiner harris of "the