to their well-being, and there is danger. we learned on that terrible day that our interests and our values are linked to inexplicably. we cannot allow poverty and disease and tyranny to continue to exist in this world or we will pay a price for it. that is the national security case for our compassion. indeed, in the national security strategy of 2002, we talked about the three d's. defense, democracy, and development. they had to go together to build a more secure and prosperous world. where despair lingers, we are not safe.

that practical case, of course, is undergirded by the moral case. the proposition that every life is precious. that every individual has potential and that any person left with out the access to education, health care, and the freedom is a world that we as americans cannot tolerate. as secretary of state, i dealt every day it with the world as it is. i knew that i had to work in the world as it is. the great thing about america is that we have always been able to imagine and to work for the world as it ought to be. not just the world as it is. that shows in our history, a history in which the germans of a certain age remember food packets.

the american relief efforts that was literally the difference between life and death for so many german citizens. american soldiers are still remembered for handing out candy to children. that picture emerges were victims of earthquakes and victims of tsunami is remembered american relief boxes that stood between despair and hope. thanks to the leadership of president and mrs. bush, and 8 years of the bush administration, and the commitment of the obama administration to those same goals, aids orphans in africa sing "america the beautiful." we went to uganda and i would

never forget that moment when literally these orphans saying one of our great national hymns. it was a moment that affirmed what it means to intervene in the lives of people who would otherwise only no hopelessness. in saudi arabia, and throughout the middle east, thanks to the work of the first lady, now continued in the current circumstances, when are no -- women are no longer ashamed to talk about a breast cancer diagnosis. i know firsthand the scourge of breast cancer. when i was 15 years old, i will never forget the day at st. mary's academy, my father was a little late picking me up from school. in the day before cell phones, i got very worried. when he finally got to me, he said that he had taken my mother to the doctor and she had been diagnosed with breast

cancer. fortunately, my mother lived for 15 years beyond that diagnosis. but i cannot imagine what would have been liked to be unable to express our concern, our despair, to pray our prayers for the terrible disease. in places in the middle east, that has been the fate of women. thanks to programs by the united states of america, we are encouraging them to speak about the disease, to get treatment, to be whole again. throughout africa and other parts of the developing world, nets protect children from the totally preventable disease of malaria caused by a mosquito bite.

yes, the united states is doing good things. in the same tradition of those german -- of the soldiers in germany who gave a candy to a child, and those boxes between life and death that. the american flag. during my time in government, i had many extraordinary experiences. perhaps the ones that i will remember most are those where you see the faces of those children and those people who have been helped. in my memory, the decisions that led us to make that difference, sitting in the oval office with president bush on that last day that we were trying to determine, the president hearing all the arguments about budgets. listening to questions about

whether or not it was good enough to be able to extend life if you could not deliver a cure. again, my mother came to mind. since she lived that 15 years lager, thanks to good treatment in the benighted states, she got to see her 15-year-old daughter become a 30-year-old woman, a professor at stanford, a person who would serve in government. she got to see me grow up and that meant a world of difference to her and to me. [applause] i said to the president, you may not be able to cure people, but extending their lives matters. we have extended many lives.

mothers and fathers who will be there for their children. [applause] i remember the decisions about crawford children's hospital. a hospital that opened in iraq despite the troubles, is hospital that was dedicated to the treatment of children with cancer. a private-public partnership with project hope that brings hope to the children of that region. the many clinics of throughout afghanistan, that finally give health care to those people to work so despised by the taliban that they executed for challenging the regime. those women executed in a stadium that had been built by the u.n. to play soccer.

it is a very tough world out there for anyone, but it is a really tough world if you are poor, living in tyranny, if you do not have access to health care, you do not have access to education. this is work that must continue. it must continue in the private sector. prue corporations, non- governmental institutions, through the angels of mercy of those relief organizations that do extraordinary work in the hardest places. i am so grateful that i've had a chance to get to know barbara bush, your daughter's work, through the global health corp. i got to meet with some of the kids around the world were going to be involved in helping to bring health care around the world. it is great because the younger generation is now devoted to and committed to this great

cause. the private sector has a lot to do. the united states government also has a lot to do. this work has got to continue. i know that we face a lot of challenges. we faced challenges of joblessness, and education system that is not quite working, if immigration policies and not quite working, we face deficits and debts and uncertainty about economic future. but let us never forgets the premise that our own security is linked to the well-being of others. and let us never forget, too, that out of chaos comes danger. the united states of america must lead. we must lead because it is important that the most compassionate and the most

generous and the freest country on the face of the earth would be the most powerful. we do not have an option to retire to take a sabbatical from leadership in the international community and in the world. if we do, one of two things will happen. there will be chaos. without leadership, there will be chaos. that is dangerous. it is quite possible that if we do not lead, someone else will. perhaps it will be someone who does not share our values of compassion, the rights of the individual, of liberty and freedom. and if someone leaves and does not share our values, the balance of power that favors freedom so carefully constructed over the last years, a balance of power that has favored freedom and brought

millions out of the tyranny of communism, millions out of the tyrian -- tyranny of totalitarianism, that will be in danger. if the balance of favor that balances -- favors freedom that favors something else, not only our values that our interests will be at risk. the united states of america has no choice but to lead. thank you for the scattering them -- this gathering that recognizes not only dumb morrill -- the moral case but a possible case in making the lives better of those less fortunate than ourselves. thank you very much. [applause]

>> the first thing, you hear the boom, you see the flash, and the next thing you hear is them crying out and painter the second thing i heard them is, you know, if i have lost anything special, you know, shoot me. >> sunday, the director of a 30- minute documentary about his friend who was severely wounded in afghanistan. the unknown, "survive, recover, live." .n c-span's q&a >> even a partially successful strategic defense initiative would mean that the soviet plan are looking at the united states could not be assured of the

outcome of an assault and a first reich on us. in the late senator malcolm wallop served in the senate from 1987-1985 and was a leading conservative during the reagan pregnancy, an early supporter of the star wars space defense system, and a leader in anti- communist policy in central america. watch him online at the c-span video library. >> next, a discussion on federal efforts to eradicate the stink bug, however i got here, and its impact on u.s. hubble growers. from "washington journal," this is just under 10 minutes.

host: why is this an issue for the federal government? guest: it became important to us in apple production last year. around and 1990's, this has built up a population in the mid-atlantic area that last year really cause devastating losses to quite a number of folks in mid-atlantic fruit production. that is one thing that galvanized our efforts. this insect as an invasive species seemed to be like nothing else we have had dealt with, with the scope of the plants that it attacks, the inability to kill it in

effectively -- effectively with most pesticides, its unique ways of living and destroyed the crops, all of those combined to make this a huge threat that last year we estimated call -- caused losses of about 18% of the apple crop in the mid- atlantic area, and that is a huge loss for one single past. host: mark seetin of the u.s. apple association, talk to us about the money and assistance you're looking for from the federal government. guest: the actual monetary loss we estimate his whole soft -- is wholesaled $37 billion. you could probably will supply that by five in terms of the retailer chain. what we did that u.s. apple

because our rovers were so concerned, we immediately -- our growers were so concerned, we looked to the u.s. research service, which provides research support to many areas of agriculture. without that infrastructure, we would have been in very bad condition because at that time we did not know it, but in fact we have been working on this insight for a number of years. though we had an incomplete knowledge base, there was some knowledge base their with which to start. have we not had that infrastructure, we would've been in much worse condition. host: we will be talking with tracy and a few seconds, but mark seetin, what are apple growers doing to combat the stink bug in terms of pesticide? what cost is it to the farmer and what will be the cost to

consumers? guest: we have a great debt we owe to the researchers with in the area. they are really under the gun of having to have this attack as and they put together a program where they work seven days a week, 24 hours a day, looking at pesticides effective against this past. and the ways the growers had to apply them, and providing information to growers on how to deal with that. as a result of that, this year, growers were certainly aware of it. they took action and follow the recommendations developed by tracey and her fellow researchers. we've actually seen some pretty significant results. harvest is still four or five days away from completion but it looks like the impact in terms of knowing them but is mobile,

it does not reside in the orchard, and you have to attack it when it starts attacking your fruit, you have to be vigilant in looking for damage because you have to deal with the bug when it is present. that vigilance and the technology in the information that we gained from the researchers has been incredibly helpful this year. host: is the apple association calling on congress to act? what is it that you hope they can do? guest: we first sought within the usda the allocation of funding resources to the agricultural research service of the scientists had the resources to address the test that we believe, we still believe, is a very significant national threat to a cross-section of agricultural production. it is not just apples or fruit. this bug attacks almost anything. we wanted to see if the usda

could provide significant research funding. the second thing, the budget is very tight right now, at the federal level, but there was a second mechanism calls the specialty crops research initiative created by congress in 2005 -- in the 2000 farm bill. most specialty crops pay all in terms of their value to corn and soybean. we got short shrift when it came to research. this was a mechanism by which specific problems or crises within specialty crop industries could receive funding allocation for research to address that. tracey and her team, we

supported very strongly the formation of this research effort, and tracy will talk about this, i am sure, putting together a one of the largest efforts in history, over 50 scientists in 10 states across the country gathered together under the specialty research institute to attack those passed on a broader array of funds so that we could get the knowledge as quickly as possible to be able to combat it. host: we have been talking with market seetin of the u.s. apple association. is the regulatory and industry affairs director. thank you for being on the program and helping us understand the problems of the stink bug. host: again, i want to emphasize, tracy, the team, and the state university researchers who they pulled together in this. if we have not had that research infrastructure, our losses would not been tens of millions but

potentially into the billions of dollars. host: mark seetin, thank you for being on the phone. >> next a discussion of the impact of the solyndra bankruptcy. from "washington journal," this is about 50 minutes. host: what is solyndra? guest: it is a solar panel manufacturer. is the first renewal will energy company that the obama administration awarded a loan

guarantee to. that produced a type of panel that did not use silicon. at that time, it seemed to be a market advantage. that changed over the last couple of years. they got this loan guarantee and then earlier this month, they filed bankruptcy and since then it has been in and downward spiral for the company and the administration. >> your road on the 14th, of bad debt or the tip of the iceberg, talk to us about that. guest: i borrowed that "qu ote from a congressman. it is coming from the perspective of valid point. with the various investigations going on within congress in different parts of the administration and the government, that answer will bear out. was this just a bad bet in terms

of that particular type of solar panel, or was this some sort of systematic problem within a loan guarantee program? even steven chu conceded that he will have to look into the program and he has been invited to testify to congress on that. host: talk to us about the hearing that took place this week. who was there and what did they talk about? guest: two top executives from solyndra were supposed to be there. but there is an fbi investigation going on, this perfect storm. they did not testify because of the bankruptcy proceedings and the fbi investigation. but the two administration officials, they had the loan guarantee program and the acting deputy director of the white house office of management and

budget. those two officials, they are the heads of the most critical parts of the administration. what i found striking was that neither one was present in the administration when this loan was approved. a lot of the questions that the republicans and democrats passed, they could not answer. they covered a lot of these pretty telling e-mails that suggested that the white house had intervened and tried to speed up the process. and there were officials that could not answer the questions because they were not there. i thought there were a lot of unanswered questions. host: we want to take a look at that hearing between representative stearns and jonathan silver of the department of energy, talking about what solyndra was spending their money on. we will take a look at that and talk more with any harder of

io