the work. you if you want this is successful third-party, look at europe. they had a significant impact on environmental policy. the i did that and you will be a billionaire and get elected -- bloomberg cannot win in a national race. it's the way the system is. i hope there is a third-party one day. but it has to start from the bottom in congressional races, but not from the top. the only thing that would be successful is shifting the ground. caller: what you miss about being share of the dnc? guest: it was the best job i

ever had besides being governor. you work for yourself and 470 people that vote for you. you do not work for the white house. if are rapidly and the right now, i would be working for the white house directly. not as much fun as doing things the way you think they ought to be done. caller: the republican leader in the senate's last week talked about you on the senate floor. we want to play this for you to get your response. >> it is preposterous at a time when 14 million americans are looking for jobs in this country for the president to be riding around on a bus saying we should raise taxes. completely preposterous for the president to be riding around on a bus saying we should raise taxes on the very folks who create jobs. we have 14 million people out of

work and two conservatives for every little in this country and the pelican is doing his best howard dean -- and the president is doing his best howard dean impersonation? guest: i am flattered. that's what the president will have to do to win the election. i the president will win. god bless him for taking my name in vain. i work part time now for a law firm in washington although i do not lobby. i am on the board of a great democracy-building group. i am going around the world trying to figure out how to help people become more democratic in some countries.

a long other list. i am interested in the charter school i work with that run by the american federation of teachers especially third grade education. a lot of stuff we do is a lost cause because we don't do anything about kids coming into the system. there's a long other list as well. caller: any practice of medicine -- host: any practice of medicine? guest: no, that would be malpractice. host: steve is on -- on the line. caller: my wife and i are registered republicans, but we have never voted straight ticket. t things today, we are

worse off. we have lost money. we will lose $4,000 per year paying more for medical because the medical system has changed, starting the first of the year. president obama was elected in 2008. instead of getting people back to work and getting the economy straightened out, was to get everybody to pay more for their medical. -- the first thing that he did was to get everybody to pay more for their medical. president obama on the campaign trail has talked about keeping people together, bringing them together to work together. yet he gives a speech after becoming president and says we have to defeat the republican enemy. people need to pay attention to

what is said all the time. guest: the health care premium increases have nothing to do with the president's health care reforms, which don't go into effect until 2014. i do think that the health-care problem is serious. i personally was not enamored of the president's bill although i do is think it has some good things in it. second, the president wanted to work with republicans. mcconnell is famous for saying to his caucus we only have one job and that is to make sure president obama is a one-term president. think that's very good. i voted for republicans in the last election in vermont. there are good people in both parties. the situation in washington is

very polarized. when is polarized, the president has an obligation to lead, because that's what the american people expect. i think that is what he is doing. i am very supportive of president. he is working with a group of people who have no interest in working with him. i think it's time the called things what they are and i'd think that will get reelected. host: did any of those three republicans win? guest: at least two. host: katy is an independent in maryland. kathy.- caller: i am concerned about inconsistencies regarding the of republicans. the stimulus plan, when it came up, the republicans make sure that they had most of the stimulus plan as tax cuts and they voted out two thirds of the jobs that originalists in the

plan. for them to say it did not work, it was part of their own fault. also, the cuts they are making in the government right now pretty much has resulted in up to 300,000 jobs lost, which seems like a guarantee for them to keep the unemployment rate around 9%, because when there's over 100,000 jobs created in the private industry it seems to me with 300,000 government jobs lost, there seems to be a net gain for the republicans to keep the unemployment rates up to 9%. the only other thing i was going to say, if the democrats want to try to win, maybe the democrats

might consider introducing a constitutional amendment to say that a citizen is a person, because people in the country would probably support that. guest: you have some very good point. what i like the most and that people don't pay enough attention to is what you said about jobs. we are gaining jobs. the private sector is creating jobs every quarter. we are losing more jobs than we are creating because the public sector jobs are going down, mostly in states and local governments, because they are broke. something i like about the president's jobs bill is it saves jobs of firefighters, police officers, and teachers. those are people losing their jobs. america cannot be more competitive if you make it harder to get a decent education.

because the republicans in congress have stood in the way of the president's attempt to jump-start the economy, states and local governments, which are in trouble financially, are losing hundreds of thousands of jobs every month. the private sector in this country is making up for more than that job loss. which is why the economy continues to grow, as it did last quarter. it went up 2.5%, which is pretty extraordinary. our problem is not jobs created in the private sector. our big problem is the public sector jobs, firefighters, police, teachers, sanitation workers, keeping our cities and towns going, those are the ones we are losing. host: 10 minutes left with our guests howard dean. westminster, california, leo, a democrat. caller: good morning, governor. one thing i would like to say is i would like to see you run again for senator. once think --

guest: i like my two senators, but thank you. caller: you should do it again. one thing i want to say is washington journal should get the age of the callers. i have lived in orange county and worked all my life as a union carpenter. i know the democrats support this illegal aliens, of getting and legalizing the. i have watched tarrant county go from straight union carpenters -- orange county go from straight union carpenters where they came into the car to enter fields and they went right to work. as they did, this became non-

union. host: any response? guest: i don't think it's fair to say the democrats supported illegal aliens. what we do believe is integration is a net positive for this country. if you don't believe that, look what's happening in arizona, georgia, alabama where they are passing draconian immigration bills. those folks are leaving, including legal people because they don't want their kids ask for their papers when they cross the street. other places are benefiting. some immigrants are moving to other places. my family was from an immigrant family and yours probably was too. i agree with you about the wage scales. i do believe that what you do not want its people working illegally who are taking away american jobs. that does happen. however, is also true, as you saw in the papers in the last couple weeks in colorado and alabama, that there are many

jobs being worked at by immigrants who when they get pushed out by the crazy legislation they are passing, and people cannot get their crops collected because americans will not do the work. door to loss $300 million in onions which rotted in the fields because of their legislature passing ridiculous bill. there's -- georgia lost $300 million. the solution is to have a sensible policy. george w. bush did have a sensible policy. he was very good on immigration. he had a balanced policy and we ought to go back-to-back in a bipartisan manner. chost: an elective office in your future? guest: i don't have borne in mind. host: next call comes from jennings, florida, republican line, david.

caller: i came to florida from indiana. in the last presidential election i was working apt the polls. mike won at the same level president obama did. i saw republicans that i knew going on the war issue./ john mccain did not have a clear difference from george bush. i think different. or to run against president obama the sierra, this clear delineation between the tibeto- bur -- there's a clear delineation between the two. i believe it between mitt romney and mr. obama, mr. obama would have a much harder time. guest: i was asked a version of this earlier in the show.

i try not to handicapped republican politics. i do expect rick perry still has a shot. he had a big problem with his entry because running for president is much different from running for governor. but he raised a lot of money. he has firm convictions. people always like people with firm convictions. i think it can be a great race on the republican side. i don't know who is the better republican candidate. it will be a close election no matter who runs. host: howard dean is the founder of democracy for america, a group run by his brother jim. ohio, bill on the democrats' line. caller: good morning. i would like to ask a couple really fast questions. the first one is, i keep hearing on the news how greece and spain

are broke and the u.s. is broke and this city does not have any money and this person does not have any money. i don't understand. there's only so many dollars in the world, so much money. if we don't have it and everybody else does not have it, where it isn't? -- where is it? next question is i would like to know why are republicans continually trying to take away from the poor, the middle class, the elderly, and giving more and more to the wealthy? guest: interesting problem. that's a point to be a big problems for whoever the republican nominee is. most people in this country believe, whether it is true or not, that the republicans by 70% are in favor of the wealthy. and that they work for big corporations. i happen to us think that is true. the four right-wing justices in the supreme court field at a

corporation has the same rights as people. try to get rid of medicare and all that. a problem for republicans is people may not like barack obama because it has been a tough four years. they like him personally, but may not want to vote for him. the alternative to the average middle-class or working person, they will not like. maybe republicans can convince them that they are for the middle-class and working people. i don't think that'll happen. i believe president obama will win. they will look at the data cabinets and decide which one cares about them the most. right now people will leave by an overwhelming majority that if barack obama cares much more about working and middle-class people than anyone on the republican side. host: there's an uncle this morning, governor dean, the party is over. talking about the decline of the

dnc, the rnc, and the congressional campaign committee is as well because of the outside groups that are now being funded. guest: there will be a decline if that continues. one of the caller suggested a constitutional amendment to get rid of that ridiculous supreme court ruling, a which is nowhere in the constitution. i read the constitution a couple weeks ago because i had to give a seminar at a college. not one place could i find that a corporation has the same rights as a person. that was invented by right-wing justices. let's have a constitutional amendment and the power of this country back in and of the middle class, which is what the founding fathers intended when they wrote the constitution. host: 4 lauderdale on the independent line -- fort lauderdale, neal. caller: absolute pleasure to talk with you gentlemen.

i do not see you as a republican nor democrat nor independence. i view you as an american, a patriot who speaks from his heart but his head as well in times of such debauchery that we are all confused. guest: thank you. caller: what i would love for you to do, in 2016, through your hat in the ring and give america back the whole that we have lost. we have lost. guest: bank. the first time you get into the presidential race is not so hard because you have no idea what you are going to face. after you have done it, you need to visit a psychiatrist to think about doing it again. it's not so easy the second time, because you know what you

are going to face. host: pennsylvania,, republican line, tom. he is gone. we move on to missouri, bob on our democrat line. caller: mr. governor, proud to be able to talk to you and fairly surprised. i remember when you're running and you said you represented the democratic wing of the democratic party and we certainly need somebody like that right now. it sounds like they just don't know how to fight the republicans any more. when they get up there and talk about a loaded tax bill, why does no one have sense enough to tell them it is loaded because of all the special provisions and loopholes that you wrote in there for the people and join the loopholes right now " and don't want to pay any taxes? someone point that

out to them? why does the president not go down to florida and point out to people that the past of thousands of possible jobs with the express rail system that he wanted to put in there, but yet applied for a two-point $5 million grant? host: thank you. governor. guest: both parties are guilty of all kinds of things in the tax code. but i do is think getting rid of earmarks is a good idea. i don't think it was a good idea for my state because earmarked for us are essential program, but it gives the american people more confidence. i am in favor of tax reform. if the republicans would be reasonable for a few minutes, they could probably get a pretty decent tax reform bill.

i think the american public wants tax reform. i think i should be able to file my own taxes. i cannot do that anymore. i need an accountant. most people ought to be able to file their own taxes, that they ought to be simple. i used to be against giving up most of the deductions like a charitable and mortgage. the canadiens have the same ownership rate of houses that we do and they do not get a deduction for their mortgage. we have to do something about the tax code. the oil industry getting $63 billion of taxpayers' money every year and nobody does anything about it. they are making money hand over fist. those are the kinds of things that makes people in both parties up with washington. host: could you see a flat tax ? guest: not a flat tax with one bracket, because it hurts people at the lower end. i'm not talking about poor people. i am talking middle class people struggling. but i certainly could see reducing everything to two or

three brackets and eliminating an enormous amount of deductions. maybe all the deductions. the only one i think we needed that charitable deduction. that makes a difference in terms of people giving. many charities do very good things. i do believe in the direction of the tax reformers. i don't want to go as far as they do. but i believe we have to simplify the tax code. host: this tweet was sent to you. guest: term limits are one of the reasons california is such a disaster right now. term limits are so short that you get people in the leadership that have been in there for their second term. i don't think that works. and the other hand, if you set them out for a while and maybe limited service in congress to 12 years or something like that, and maybe that would be something reasonable. i come from a small state.

term limits hurt us because we get attention because our senators stay for long time and receive a lot of security. it's a very difficult issue. i often say that the new generation is much more focused on working together that our generation and may instead of term limits we ought to have a rule betz's you cannot serve in the senate or house unless you are under 60 years old and things could get a little better that way. host: peter, republican, you have the last word. caller: ok, i think in regards to occupy wall street, we need to instead of blowing all this money on stimulus, we start building factories instead and get government and corporations

working together to bring manufacturing back. guest: he's right about that. i would add something. i would stop wall street from trading defaults cops back and forth and investing the money in what peter is talking about. that's what we need to do. jeffrey immelt has a great letter to the shareholders, a couple years ago and he laid out what is really going to happen. we are going to start focusing on bringing manufacturing back to this country and it will be less of a consumer-driven society. the caller is basically right. we have to get wall street doing their job again. this is a group of people supposed to be allocating capital to productive resources. there's nothing productive about trading collateralized mortgage obligations and not knowing who owns the house, trading cd's back and forth and

turning wall street into a gambling casino. right now it's a gamble casino. people on wall street have to figure out how to invest in things that create wealth and create jobs against four people other than themselves. host: to your support the occupy wall street movement? guest: i am, but i don't want them ever to get violent. i think the younger generation knows better than that. this movement is basically without leadership, which is for better or for worse, not taken over by politicians, but expressing a sentiment most people believe in this country, but this country has lost its way not to us because politicians have lost their way, but because the pfinancial community has lost its way part because of the elimination of -steegal.

host: do you see yourself visiting any of those spots? guest: i travel a lot, so i daresay i well. -- will host: banks for joining us. -- thanks for joining us. we are now looking at the usda national agricultural statistics service. cynthia clark is the administrator. bob young is the chief economist with the american farm bureau federation. dr. clark, what is the national agricultural statistics service? >calleguest: it is one of 14 mar federal statistics agency. we collect data that is timely and useful on agriculture. the other agencies focus on other sectors of the economy.

we issue over 500 reports each year. they are issued all through the year. we have weekly, monthly, quarterly, annual, and we even have a sense is done every five years. host: what is the value in these reports? guest: the value is to a large number stakeholders. the commodity traders are very interested in our reports. farmers, ranchers, investors, agribusiness, policy makers as well. a wide community of users. host: you have from your reports ranking of u.s. farm products by cash receipts in 2010. u.s. farms sold $314 billion worth of products in 2010. cattle being the most audible,

followed by corn and poultry and eggs, etc.. guest: guess, that is a very important statistic -- yes. one of the interesting aspects is that agriculture is now in the forefront of a number of societal issues. 315 billion may not seem like a lot of money that's coming from the agriculture industry, but agriculture touches on so many societal issues. feeding the future, food security, climate change, conservation, water usage, food and nutrition, many different issues. you will notice that the commodities that are receiving the most cash receipts have changed over the time that we have been collecting data. cattle has the largest cash receipts. and corn and soybeans.

poultry has grown in the industry as have pigs and dogs. -- hogs. host: bob young is with the american farm bureau. according to the u.s. department of commerce, agriculture brings in a surplus when it comes to trade. it predicted that there will be a $137 billion worth of agricultural exports this year with about $94 billion in imports in agriculture for surplus of about $42 billion. guest: agriculture is one of the few sectors of our economy that does maintain that kind of trade surplus year after year. we have had some years where we have gotten close, but we have been in a trade surplus situation with respect to agricultural products almost forever. we are a very competitive country in terms of the cost of production and in terms of

transportation and facilities, -- our ability to put product into the market quickly, adequate supplies to ship those products, a good distribution systems that do respond quickly. all that kind of coming together to make it very competitive in global markets. host: how would you define the role of government in america's agricultural economy? guest: first, it is important for us to recognize that we want farmers. we want the ranchers to go out and take a risk every year of putting their crops in the ground so we have adequate food supplies. that we are able to maintain the trade surplus situation and so on. the role of government and agriculture is to provide the downside safety, to provide us with risk protection that we want farmers to take the risk

and they're willing to take the risk. host: when we hear the term agricultural subsidies, what does that mean and how much does the u.s. taxpayer pay? guest: it is important to recognize that when we talk about farm bills, the great bulk of the spending out of a farm bill goes to nutrition programs, goes to snap and school lunch and those kinds of programs and not necessarily into direct agricultural subsidies. about $65 billion obese bent over the next 10 years in commodity program subsidies. we will also spend about $80 billion also on crop insurance. some of that downside risk protection that is the proper role for government to play. we will also spend over the next 10 years. host: we are looking at

agriculture. if you live in the mountain and pacific time zone, 737-002. and we do want to hear from farmers, 628-0205. guest: you will notice that the graph shows a slight increase in farms. from 1990 to 2010. 1990 -- in 2000 there was a change in definition that included horse farms and christmas tree farms, which accounted for slight increase. 2010, we have been able to

increase the coverage of minority farms and small farms. and disadvantaged farms probably the number has been pretty constant for the last 20 years. host: one of the startling figures is the drop from 1960 to 1970 in the number of farms. almost 4 million farms to the 0.8. where did all those folks go? guest: there was an increase in farm productivity, which is part of the reason for the drop. there were also -- was also an increase in people leaving the farm at at time. bob may be able to give more permission on a good reason for the decrease. host: or their policy decisions or economic changes? guest: economic changes. the relative income in the farm households during that time versus what they could get by moving into town was pretty

substantially different. so that was one of the reasons. economic opportunities to move into town and get an additional jobs. you also had very severe problems with financial downturn, high interest rates, all that good stuff, that drove many folks off the farm as well. it has stabilized in the last couple decades or so. part of that is definitional change, but also the income situation on the farm is now much more comparable to what we have an account. host: how do you define a farm? guest: as defined in the sensors, any side that can produce one of thousand dollars of sales in year or could have produced that amount in sales. and that includes someone with an archer of not getting the production from that order. it is a very marginal definition.

we will show the size of the farms at some point in our presentation. there's quite a large number of these very small farms. -- farms includes orchards that are not yet getting production from the orchard. host: average cellular of agricultural products sold, 134,800. guest: that would include farms producing 1000 to much larger amounts. host: the number of farms, how many are large farms? that's $500,000 and over. guest: we have that on one of our graphs. 5.2%.

host: you can look at it right here. 73% of american farms are $500,000 and over farms. guest: no, 73% of the sales. host: only 5.3% of the farms in america sell over $500,000 or more. the majority are tense thousand dollar farms. this could be someone who has a vegetable garden and cells from the roadside? guest: it could be. my son has student and sells the exit ram -- sells the eggs.

host: 100,000 to 500,000, 0.9% of farms. bob, speak to the fact that 5.3% produce 73% of the revenue. guest: one of the important things to recognize as we will get the numbers is the great majority, 92% of farming operations in the u.s. are family-run corporations or run operations. they. -- they are not corporate farms. they are family operations. family farms. host: we want to hear from our farming community watching c- span.

we will begin with michael, a farmer in medina, ohio. you have to turn down the volume on your tv. make your comment or question. caller: how much food do you think is wasted and how much money is wasted in the united states on the whole? guest: what you mean by that question? caller: how much food to people has and the sanitation aske depicted up here -- has to pifck ck it up? guest: that varies from household to household. i've heard it's in the 10% to 15% range. maybe somebody has a better number. host: appleton, wisconsin, mary.

caller: i was wondering about the republicans and their vendetta against illegal aliens. if they really got their way, how much would our food cost? host: is that an issue that the farm bureau looks at? guest: we have. historical in the neighborhood of 700,000 or 800,000 hired workers in the u.s. the h2a guest worker visa program in the u.s. in the neighborhood of about 30,000 to 50,000 or so. our membership and farmers around the country are trying very hard to make sure they have properly documented workers, but it does become a challenge when we really don't have a program out there that provides folks with that kind of opportunity.

we could say we want to hire domestics -- and i have spoken to many of our members that were part to higher domestic workers, but you run into the problem of folks not wanting to go do that work. it's not an issue of the wages. we are paying noticed a better than the minimum wage. $13 or $14 an hour by the time we figure the costs into the equation. how much will the food prices go? upon't know they will go that much, but there would be a shift. we are seeing movement of fruit and vegetable production to south of the border already and to outside of the u.s. that would be something that would come back to haunt us on the trade numbers. host: another map of the u.s. put out by cynthia clark's

organization, but usda agricultural statistics service center. the more green you see on this map, the more farmland. dark green, 99% of these counties in dark green are farmland. as you decline in color it goes down to the very light green and that would be 30%. probably no surprise to a lot of people that the midwest and great plains are a lot of farmland. next call comes from doylestown, pennsylvania, maggie. caller: my biggest concern is big agriculture putting small farmers out of business. i believe [inaudible] [unintelligible] a lot of things will come to light. i have a question about gmo

foods that would include cotton seed, soy. genetically modified. corn as well. why they are not labeled? why we are eating this and it is making us six? -- sick? allergies have gone up in the last 10 years. guest: the issue of large farms taking over small farms, i think you can see the great bulk of operations we have in the u.s. today and are small operations. they do tend to be a lifestyle choices, hobby operations to a large extent. there has been quite a bit of change over the last 20 or 30 years or so, movement away from the middle. we have had an increase in the number of smaller operations and an increase in the number of

larger operations and movement away from the middle because folks have faced economic decisions. they may have had to get larger to be financially viable or you have to decide your point to go do something else. that has been a longstanding trend in agriculture in the united states. on gmo, there has been substantial improvements in our yield and production practices, quality of product, because of gmo's. we have the ability to produce corn and soybeans without having to till the soil. so we have seen a dramatic

production ini soil erosion -- in soil erosion. there have been real environmental benefits to gmo's. you can put a gene into plant that kills the bucks. . -- bugs. and you can specifically target worms or bugs and have minimal environmental effects because you abused genetics and these types of products -- because you have used genetics and these types of products. guest: we do not measure the exports.

the world agricultural outlook board does provide quite a bit of information on wosupply and demand for the world on various commodities. you might talk to. them to host: but you do measure the states with the largest agricultural product or by farm sales. what is the biggest in america? guest: california is one of the largest. iowa is close behind. texas has cattle. then there are other states in the midwest. nebraska, kansas, missouri. and then even wisconsin with dairy. host: and north carolina. guest: north carolina has poultry. host: farms in every state? guest: yes.

host: what about florida when it comes to citrus? do you know the aggregate number for florida farm sales? guest: i don't know that offhand. but citrus is very big primarily in florida with some citrus in california. host: how many of the to 0.2 million farmers in america are members of the american farm bureau? guest: the vast majority. better than 6 million. -- better than 6 million member families in our organization from maine to lie a and from north dakota to texas and every place in between. all 50 states as well as puerto rico have farm bureau tempters. host: mississippi, good morning. caller: good morning. viagra up in this -- i grew up in mississippi where we had

plenty of cotton and soybeans and there was a lot of farming going on in mississippi. i don't remember the year, but i remember when they started paying farmers to stop farming and import stuff from overseas and other areas. when they stopped people in mississippi from farming, a lot of people in mississippi became dependentson food stamps -- became dependent on food stamps. when they stopped people from the book to sell their products, they stopped people from driving. -- thriving. guest: back in the 1970's and early 1980's we were operating programs that did actually asked folks to take land out of production. we have since moved away from that. since the mid 1990's and forward the government does not have

that authority anymore to ask people to take land out of production. terms of cotton production, mississippi has gone through quite a bit of bit over the last 10 or 15 years. the u.s. is a major exporter of cotton in the world. we probably export of boards of 15 out of every 20 million bales of cotton we produce. -- upwards of 15 of every 20. i will say that, we have moved away from those programs and land retirement programs other than a few government programs still operating. a very different situation today. host: do you measure the value of farmland and per acre cost?

guest: per acre cost ? we do measure the value of farmland. probably california has the most valuable farmland of because you have so many specialty crops there. those are high-value crops. i presume also the land in the midwest is very valuable. host: i want to come back to this chart from your organization. average value of agricultural products. it was $47,000 in 1978. in 2007, $134,000. that is pretty nice. is this inflation-adjusted? guest: no. if you look inflation-adjusted, which i believe we also provided, it shows quite a different picture.

host: i will show that to our viewers. we see this chart where everything is going up. and here is the inflation- adjusted chart. 47 cows and dollars in 1978. in 2007 that is $150,000 worth of product. those are 2007 numbers, so they may not to have reflected the recent rise in prices of corn, which could in fact affect those numbers. it looks more like we are not making any increases in the amount of income that the average farmer receives. host: what does it cost to run a farm on average?

guest: economic research service report that. that's a different federal agency. hguest: we help collect data from the agricultural research management survey. the economic research service does the analysis of the data. we are -- our primary responsibility is data collection. host: patty is a farmer in indiana. caller: i had 7 acres a few years ago. [unintelligible] i would get a payment from the usda. [unintelligible] i was surprised that i was considered a farm, because it's

only 7 acres planted. i have a little more than that now. i cannot have a farm because the equipment is too big to get to the entrance to my field. host: is the cost of operating a farm. but i -- is the cost of operating a farm prohibitive to the people and wanting to break into it? guest: it is technical and you need to know what you are doing. you cannot proceed in the ground and wait for it to grow. host: if someone wanted to grow 100 acres of soybeans in indiana, what would you guess would be that capitalization costs? guest: you could go out and get go out-- get someone to plant

and harvest for you. you could take care of the management. but just the cash cost of putting the crop in the ground and taking it out of the ground would run you up through a couple hundred dollars an acre. corn, probably up to a $500 an acre to put the crop in the ground and taken out. cotton, $600 an acre. you will spend half a million dollars on a new cotton acre. it takes a lot of savvy to get into this business. there are some activities. you can grow fruits and vegetables, strawberries. there are things you can do with a small plot of land. even there, you still have to be very technically savvy and dairy

business savvy to make a go of it. host: anchorage, alaska. andrew. caller: thank you. i was wondering about the effects of the usda's farming practices in the 1940's, 1950's, 1960's, and if that had a major effect in the decrease in minority and small farms and the effect of the migration of minority farmers traveling south, the great migration, did that contribute a lot to the decrease in small farms? host: thanks for calling. guest: no. it's probably more of what the general economic conditions in those decades was. again, you had a substantial income disparity between what somebody was going to get on the

farm versus what somebody was going to get it down. people have the ability to make choices and they decided to go into town and worked there as opposed to working on a farm. there are a lot of farms and maybe not, but there are forms -- farms in alaska although it's one of the smaller states for us. guest: we find out who owns the land on our senses for agriculture. we have done a land ownership survey and although it's been about 15 years. host: is there minority ownership as well measured by you? guest: yes. it is really the operator of the farm we are interested in, not so much the owner of the land. the owner is not necessarily affiliated with farm operations. we do have data on that.

what we have done recently is focused more on enumeration of smaller and disadvantaged and minority farms. what i pointed out to you was the number of farms for the last 20 years, probably we did a much better job in 2010 than we did in the past. so the farms have probably been around, but [unintelligible] host: last call from las vegas, nevada. ken. ♪ caller: i want to know how much of the food is genetically altered? host: if we produce the exports and then we want to bring up the organic farms.

here is the export that we showed earlier. predicted that $137 billion of exports will be sent out of the country from the u.s. farms with an important about $94 billion. $42 billion surplus in farm imports/exports. guest: we export substantial amounts of soybeans and cotton, a fair amount of corn. we are shipping out more and more meat. about one in 8 hogs raised in the u.s. leaves the u.s. or rather the meat. and 1 of 7 chickens, the meat. host: do you measure whether

they are pointed a genetically modified? guest: you know based on production. guest: we use the usda definition of organic farms. we did a survey of organic farming in 2008. we measured about 14,000 certified or exempt organic farms. this is a growing. we know that it will be increasing. right now we are doing a survey for the risk management agency to look at prices of organic products. host: cynthia clark and bob young, thank you so much. that's the end of "washington journal"today. american history tv all weekend of c-span3. you will be able to see mitt romney a little later today and

joe biden later today. then of course the contenders at 8:00 p.m. tonight. enjoy your weekend. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> the associated press reports that president barack obama will announce two executive actions on the economy. both of them intended to give a boost to businesses. he has recommended that agencies shorten the time it takes research to turn into products. there is also an online site to be created within 90 days or companies to find information on federal services. here is what some of our live

coverage looks like today. libya also ambassador to the u.s. will be talking about the revolution in that country. we will have live coverage at 1:00 p.m. eastern. the ambassador was appointed by the revolution back in february. c-span will be live with a discussion on how federal and state budgets might change children's services. vice president biden is the keynote speaker at the florida democratic party convention. we will have coverage at 7:30 p.m. eastern. speakers include debbie wasserman schultz and the state democratic party chairman. tonight at 7:30 p.m. >> although this headline proved

false, dewey continue to impact political history. follow the career of thomas dewey, influence in national politics in the elections of eisenhower and nixon. tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. >> spend this weekend in knoxville, tennessee which "book tv" and "american history tv."

a real life csi. and a look at alex haley and his roots in not sell. on "american history tv," an indian silversmith created a system of writing for the cherokee language. and a visit to the secret city. the lap's part in the development of the atomic bomb. -- lab's part in the development of the atomic bomb. saturday at 11 a.m. and sunday at 6:00 p.m. eastern. >> middle and high school students, it is time to get those cameras rolling for this

year's student cam competition. you could win a grand prize of $5,000. >> former pakistani president pervez musharraf says american actions prior to 9/11 were a disaster for pakistan. he spoke for just over an hour this week in washington.

>> the importance of u.s.- pakistan relations does not make it satisfactory to each country. nor does the importance mean the two governments trust each other. in washington, the feeling is that the relationship in the past was broken because pakistan pursue its interests and activities that it knew were contrary to u.s. interests and that washington would have to deal with that. in pakistan, it is felt that it be united states is a fair weather friend. -- that the united states is a fair weather friend. we see this in the relationship of discourse between the two. we are concerned that the interest are contrary enough that there will be another separation. there are a number of elements

-- a number of elements of mutual frustration. but the mutual importance remains. it is worthwhile to try to explore ways to build shared purposes and understanding event is -- even if mutual trust is a little too much to expect now. there are few people better qualified to address these issues than former president pervez musharraf. he served in the pakistani army for more than 40 years, driving to its highest position, the chief of staff. from that position, he took power in pakistan in 1999 and became president in 2001. he continued as president until 2008. he is a civilian today, but remains keenly well positioned to address the future of u.s.- pakistan relations. president musharraf has been squeezed on the front end of congress. he has to go back to the hill. he has said that he will spend

the assigned time here. he will make some remarks and then we will take plentiful questions. with that, let me ask you to welcome general musharraf. [applause] >> my profound apologies for being late. i was held back. with that, may i express my gratitude to george and the carnegie endowment for international peace for giving me this opportunity to speak to such an august gathering. i will get to the subject. i will speak about our region

and about pakistan. within that, i must cover the united states-pakistan relations, which have achieved some kind of criticality at this moment. i would like to start with recalculating history from 1979 onward. sometimes our memories are short and we forget what has happened in the region. that will be the case for what we are doing and what we have now. i will take the time from 1979 to 1989. it was 1979 when the soviet union invaded pakistan and occupied afghanistan. this created a violation of u.s. policy, which believes in containment of soviet expansion.

the soviet union was trying to get to the warm waters of the indian ocean through pakistan. there was a collision of u.s. and pakistan interests. we decided to launch a jihad. jihad is a holy word. when i say we, the united states and pakistan, decided to launch a holy war. we wanted to attract mujahideen, holy warriors, from the muslim world. we attracted 35,000 which in dean -- mujahideen. we recruited trained, armed taliban from pakistan and put

them into afghanistan. this continued for 10 long years. there are a touchy point i want to highlight that are significant. -- there are two points that i want to highlight that are significant. this war against the soviet union was spearheading by religious militant groups. this is the one point you need to understand. the second point is that when the soviet union occupied afghanistan, one year before that, they deposed the king. afghanistan was held together through an arrangement, at a national covenant.

a national agreement between the four major ethnic groups. they live together, stayed together under the sovereignty of the king. when the soviet union deposed the king, the glue that held afghanistan together was no longer there. when we are talking about political solutions, we are talking about creating another national covenant that will hold the country together, which implies a proportional representation of all of the ethnic groups. the major ethnic group being pashtun. i will talk more about this later. this went from went -- from 1979 to 1989. the united states started to

change course and abandon the place. without any rehabilitation or resettlement of the refugees who were armed and new only to fight. this was unfortunate -- knew only to fight. this was a shift of policy. the amendment that denies all legal -- military assistant to -- denied all military assistance to pakistan. also, may i say that with this policy shift that because of this policy shift, abandonment of afghanistan, which demeanor in afghanistan coalesce -- the mujahideen coalesced and became

qaeda. in 1996, the taliban emerged. from 1989 to 1996, 10 ethnic groups were fighting among themselves. the ravaged the country. total anarchy in afghanistan. in 1996, it became the pakistan, which were all pashtun. -- it became the taliban, which were all pashtun. as far as pakistan is concerned, another element started. indian health cashmere. its impact on -- indian held kashmir.

volunteers preparing and wanting india as part of cashmere and were fighting the indian army. -- kashmir. and were fighting the indian army. it continued in a different form. all parties fighting each other. taliban emerged. this new freedom struggle, religious militancy from the east and west of pakistan. pakistan became a victim of religious militancy. my deduction, ladies and gentlemen, pakistan is not the protector of terrorism.

we became a victim of circumstances in the region. then comes 9/11, ladies and gentlemen. after 9/11, the terrorist attack here, it was most terrible. pakistan joined the coalition. i made the decision of joining the coalition in pakistan's own interests. i realized i knew that pakistan is a moderate country. pakistan wants to be a progressive, enlightened, moderate country. taliban's understanding of islam is not for pakistan. we would not have liked to be on

the taliban side so we joined the coalition. here i want to highlight a few blunders. the first blunder is 1989 when the united states abandon afghanistan without resettlement of the mujahideen. the second blunder was in 1996 when the taliban emerged. at this moment, i remember in march of 2000 when president clinton came to pakistan. he was persuading me not to be with the taliban. i told him at that time that i would suggest a different strategy. that we all recognize the taliban and let us moderate them form with then. -- from within.

confronting them or not recognizing them -- it is better to recognize them and moderate them from within. had we done that, maybe we could have resolved the osama bin laden issue. if there were 100 missions, the president of afghanistan has not agreed to moderation. the second blunder after 9/11, i would like to highlight. the taliban and al qaeda ran into pakistan. there was a vacuum in afghanistan, a political backing. here was a situation with the -- a political vacuum.

this military victory had to be conducted -- converted into a political victory. an ethnically proportionate legitimate government to be placed in kabul. we could have done that. when we have a proportional government, we have to have a pashtun on board. it had to be pashtun dominated. the pashtuns have always dominated afghanistan. all pashtun are not taliban. we must liberate the pashtun from the taliban and give them

the dominant position in the government in kabul. it has not been done. the dominant position of governance in afghanistan -- i personally feel that this window of opportunity that i am talking about persisted from 2002 until early 2004. two long years. the taliban and al qaeda were dismantled. they were in pakistan and we were acting against them successfully. all of the people were apprehended in pakistan. all of them you see in guantanamo were captured by isi

in pakistan. this was done successfully in pakistan. when the al qaeda -- when al qaeda went down, the taliban resurgence started in 2004. it started because the pashtun were not taken on board. the resurgence started in 2004 and the resurgence carries on even now, unfortunately. this was the third blunder where we could have utilized this two year when the will opportunity. we failed. now in 2011, we are trying to stop the taliban now. the taliban is not a monolith. when we talk of the taliban, i do not know which taliban anyone is talking to.

which taliban are we talking to is not clear. we are in a complex situation. what is the complexity now? there is taliban resurgence and a dominant position for the taliban now. in afghanistan, there is some al qaeda but mainly pakistani taliban. the third issue as far as pakistan is concerned is they try to spread the taliban into pakistan. the fourth issue is that there are mujahideen in pakistan. the groups that were oriented

toward fighting the indian army in cashmere. they have developed relationships with the taliban. there is extremism in our society in certain areas. they are rising because they have relations with the taliban. this is the complexity of the situation in pakistan. whether it is al qaeda, who are foreigners, taliban of pakistan, military, socio- economic requirements, expansion of taliban, trying to spread talibanization, orientation toward kashmir, resolution of kashmir disputes, extremism in our society, a long-term strategy of education,

enlightenment, economic welfare. this is the complexity of problems pakistan faces. i would be remiss if i did not count india. there is a rise in the extremism in muslim youth in india. the last attacks in bombay were done by local mujahideen. what is the reason? unequeal treatment of the muslims or alienation. there is a tendency for a nexus. there is an etin in china.

-- etim in china. they have come into tribal agencies in afghanistan and joined hands with al qaeda. there is extreme al qaeda. there is al qaeda in the arab peninsula and in yemen and somalia. all trying to have underground nexus. this is the complexity of the situation. i do not know the scenario here. this is a complex situation. we have to understand the entire complexity of the situation. it is the most unfortunate thing. it is unfortunate because we have to have a commonality of thought and action if we want to defeat terrorism and

extremism and if you want to combat terrorism and extremism. the one thing i want to highlight is that one has to look at the strategic plane in pakistan. what is pakistan's policy? what is pakistan's overall strategy and direction where terrorism and extremism is concerned, where al qaeda is concerned? the pakistan army has suffered over 3000 dead. 350 killed through recent bombings by the taliban. by al qaeda, the same enemy.

this isi, may i also point out, this is the same isi that has saved many lives around the world. in 2005, 10 airliners were on transatlantic flights and work to be bombed. this issue of the containment of liquids and you cannot have 3 milliliters of something in your hand carry it is because of that. they were going to blow them up with liquid explosives. who did this? isi did it. isi is much maligned today.

they are the rogue elements. is it possible that strategically they are pro- taliban? this does not stand to logic. i would like to clarify what the hell is happening? there is a problem at the modalities and the ending of situations. there may be a misunderstanding. there may be a difference of opinion. anyone who tries to comfort this misunderstanding or difference of opinion to reflect that isi and the army are encouraging and affecting the army to kill united states' soldiers and bombed embassies.

the reality is suspect. admiral mullen came here. when a person of admiral mullen's stature says they are an extension of isi, he means the army is against the united states and they are with the taliban. that means pakistan is the enemy. pakistan is not a friend. pakistan is not a coalition member. we have to be discreet and understanding and accurate in this understanding.

it is totally against the interests of the united states and pakistan and the region. it is the unity of thought and action against the taliban and al qaeda. i would like to bring out why this has happened and what can we do to fix this problem. from the united states' point of view, i would like to amend that pakistan needs to clarify the two elements, which lead to this trust and confidence deficit. why was osama bin laden in abbottabad. was it negligence?

i would only like to say that with all of my honest conviction, this is a case of terrible negligence, which ought to be investigated and punished. the second issue -- the bonus of proving this to the united states is a difficult thing to prove. we have to prove it. i know it to be true. it is not a case of complicity. the second issue is a group that is in waziristan. the onus of clarifying lies on pakistan.

they must do it. i would like to limit that they are not doing a good job. they must prove to the world -- to admit that they are not doing a good job. is there a problem that the army knows about? is there a problem that the enemy is too strong? they have to clarify why. i would be remiss if i did not point out that there are some areas that the united states must understand pakistan. number one, the united states has decided to leave in 2014, leave afghanistan. if i were a leader there, you

give me an analysis. what do you see when you leave afghanistan? are you leaving a stable afghanistan or an unstable afghanistan. based on that, i in afghanistan would have to take my own countermeasures. this is important. if you leave afghanistan in an unstable condition or not a fully stable condition -- fully stable militarily and politically -- then i presume there are two possibilities in my personal analysis. either afghanistan goes back to 1989 fighting against each other, or it goes back to 1996 when it was the pashtun taliban on one side and the northern alliance on the other side.

in either case, pakistan has to fend for itself. the adverse impact will be on pakistan. leaders in pakistan must think of securing pakistan. the united states must sit down with pakistan and discuss these issues. the second element, which needs clarification -- i know there is an indian sitting here. he is a good friend of mine. my bluntness does not mean i am on popular in india. >> you were born in india. [laughter] >> yes.

that is why i say india and pakistan must have peace. i am a strong believer that they must have peace. india is trying to create an anti-pakistan islamacism. i know this through intelligence. i know this to be a fact. just to give you proof, today in afghanistan, the diplomats, the security and intelligence people all go to india for training. not one has come to pakistan. they go there and they come back and they get indoctrinated against pakistan. over the years since our

independence, afghanistan has always been anti-pakistan because the soviet union and india have close relations in afghanistan. the intelligence and the kgb in afghanistan have always been in cooperation. and they should be. we must not allow this to continue. one must not grudge if isi orders counter measures to protect its own interests. the two intelligence agencies have been on a conflict course since 1960.

if i am allowed -- when the leadership from the united states or anywhere says pakistan has not done enough and we need to do more, this is annoying to a common man in pakistan. we have suffered 35,000 dead. 350 isi people killed. generals killed. general's children killed. what more should pakistan to? we are doing our best. don't keep saying that we need to do more.

we must counter all of these problems. lastly, let me come to pakistan itself. today, pakistan is suffering a dysfunctional government. there is a situation in the right cheek. there is an economic collapse in pakistan. there are also floods. pakistan is in bad shape. my dismay is that pakistan has the resources and the potential to stand on its own feet. in the 8 years that i government, all of the socio- economic factors were going up. yearning to reach out to the sea on the north. india to our east. we provide the connectivity all trade activity in the region. no trade within this region without pakistan's involvement.

that is because of our central location. we are a country that is self- sufficient in water, self- sufficient in food, self- sufficient even in energy. we have hydro electricity more than our requirements. we have mastered nuclear technologies. we manufacture energy through coal and gas and alternative sources. the only thing we lack is oil.

all of the capacity is certainly available. a tremendous amount of natural resources. what is the problem? we are economically self sustainable. the proof of it is, in 2006, pakistan was declared one of the next 11 economically viable countries of the world. after the bric four -- brazil, russia, india, china. how did this happen? did i have a magic wand? it was the resources of pakistan. we utilize our own resources and our own potential to control the budget imbalance and the budget deficit, the fiscal deficit, the balance of payments deficits by increasing our earnings,

reducing our expenditures. my i say the debt to gdp ratio, which was 103%, was reduced to 52%. the per capita income rose to over $100,000 in six years. why is it that the same country, the same people, the same resources in 1990. in 2007, we are in 11th. now we are going down toward disaster again. the answer lies that there is a leadership vacuum.

it is the governance that fails pakistan. government and leaders are showing up by the political system. by the elections. it is here that we fail. no government elected in a democratic way has done good governance in pakistan. irresponsibility of a leader, development of the people, develop and of the state. this is what any leader in any government have to do. otherwise, the people reject them. that is the problem of pakistan.

no good leadership. not doing well for the people. the problem is pulling up good leadership through the political process. we are heading toward an election in 2013, when a half years away. if we do not bring about a political change and changing the political status quo, people of pakistan and rejecting those who have been tried, and tested, and failed, we will continue on the downward slide. we have to produce another political all tested in pakistan that can understand the problems of pakistan, and is honest enough to deal with problems and determination. it is for this reason that i am comfortable giving lectures. my interest is less comfortable for myself.

i have decided to join politics. we have to create a third political organization with other like-minded people. i will try to do that. that is why i have entered politics and have decided to go back to pakistan in march of 2012, or earlier if i am to spring a military supplies and deception. that is what i intend to do. i believe is better to try and fail than to go down without trying.

for the sake of the country, i will take a chance. that is all i have to say. thank you. [applause] >> we are going to take questions now. when i call on you, please briefly say who you are. let's start with this lady in the fifth row. give a microphone to each of them. >> i am a television reporter for voice of america. on one of our english language shows, you said democracy is a mind-set and you did a lot of things for democracy. why has your party not been able to support the pakistani soapbox?

-- attract support from the pakistani public?>> i never said democracy is a mind-set. i said dictatorship is a mind- set. i believe always and i continue to believe in democracy. most of the civilian governments in pakistan -- it is not a matter of whether i am in uniform or not. i did so much for nurturing democracy. democracy does not start and end at having elections and a political government. it starts with how you govern.

it is the essence of democracy. empowerment of the people and women and the media. that is freedom. i did all of that. coming to your next question. why do the people not support? i would be mad if i go back without the people's support. i know how much support there is and how much there is not. i am keeping a pulse. in march 2007, my support was 78%. in one year, it dipped. i resign from my presidentship. many people were crying in pakistan. the men who were filming me or recording me were crying and right in front of me. it was a great reception.

there is support. there is certainly support for me in pakistan. it i am to believe today that there is so much support that i win the next election, i would be in denial. i am a realistic person. i must not over assess myself or under assess myself. there is support and i am now trying to build that support through organizing my party. i have already done that at the four provinces. we have organizing committees in the 52 of the district in pakistan. i will go to the 6500 union councils of pakistan. in one year, nobody else has gone from scratch with a new

party. let me show you, i am giving it a good try. i can never be sure that i can develop that kind of support that i will win alone. but i will give it a try. >> i am a documentary filmmaker. when you are elected president, would you take a new approach to these problems in kashmir? will you take steps to resolve this with india? will you make efforts to bring these two under control? >> thank you very much. thank you for same when you get elected. it means you are sure i will get elected. it should be if i get elected.

thank you for all of your confidence in me. on kashmir, let me say that it was a passion with me to resolve a this feud and bring india and pakistan closer. when we had a cricket match between india and pakistan, the city was quite anti-india. the people in pakistan were cheering the indian team. i was encouraging this interaction. the issue with kashmir have to be resolved. i think they can be signed yesterday. we just need leadership to say sign it and finish it off.

kashmir is a problem. demilitarization, giving maximum self governance. we were moving forward. we need to do that again. i believe in peace. it is to the advantage of india and pakistan. i had banned the mujahideen in my time.

they have great public sympathy. they need to be dealt with in a sensitive matter. we will pull the rug under their feet. it is easier said than done. we need to handle them with care. they are well organized. when we had the earthquake in 2005, they have an organization. it was probably the best ngo and became popular because of the relief efforts they have.

a lot of people were suggesting, let's ban them. i said, if we do that -- they have helicopters called the engines of mercy -- if they shoot one of them down, no relief would be possible in india. we have to handle these things with understanding and skill. we would like to do that again. >> i would like to follow up on the kashmir question. there was a lot of progress made in the back channels with india. what you and others say about the importance of afghanistan and the great concern about pakistan and india's role in afghanistan -- even if you formalize an agreement on

kashmir, where would afghanistan chime in? >> i have always believed that state relations have more to do with interpersonal relations between leaders. why was there so much trust and confidence between the united states and pakistan when i was there? that was because i had excellent communication and a personal relationship with president bush. i went to colin powell's house. i could pick up the phone and talk to president bush. on pakistan and india, i

developed a good interpersonal relations with both prime ministers. i will add without any reservations that i found both of them to be good people. i found both of them flexible. very sincere. we were moving forward. with this relationship, i am sure we can address all issues. what i said about afghanistan is certain knowledge. i would not mention anything that is in doubt. i know this is happening. if leadership has relations, you will attract them to the common good of everyone. we need to address it. we need all three to develop an understanding, pakistan, afghanistan, and india.

>> i got to go back and forth. go ahead. >> i'm with the pakistani spectator. my question is regarding shareff. he was twice democratically elected. he was pro-business, relaxing the business law so that pakistan became attractive to foreign investment, which resulted in more jobs for the people. even today, it is one of the most popular, viable leaders and loved by the people. did it concern you that you deposed him without any

democratic process whatsoever? were you viewed negatively by the international community. >> your figures are totally distorted. in 1999, i came on the scene. $400 million is the investment coming to pakistan. do you know our revenue collection? this is the performance of shareff? poverty was at 34%. we brought it to 17%. do not believe me. go and find out.

go and find out about industry. we had 2.9% televisions. our televisions are over 70%. do you know what people were doing? they were coming to my office. please understand what was happening in pakistan and now. coming to the second part, that

he is a popular man. when benazir came, she was assassinated and he came back. you are right. he was popular. with the job they are doing in the biggest province, the villages but only two hours of electricity. there is total mis-governance in punjab, there is a sharp decline in his popularity. in south punjab, he is almost out. his base is not in central punjab. he is not as popular as you think. also, may i say -- i call him a

closet taliban. [laughter] he is an extremist. those in punjab are now his political partners. if he comes to govern in pakistan, he would be a bigger disaster than the present situation. >> we would be glad to host a debate if he comes to washington. >> he will never come. you call him and i will sit right here. >> i will call on you. i call on this gentleman that there.

>> is what with the american jewish committee. we were privileged to give a donation of $100,000 to pakistan to send kosher meals to the affected area. in recent years, we have reached out to the american community and have tried to reach out to the pakistan- american community. when you were president, the foreign minister met with the foreign minister of palestine. the israelis and many israeli jews saw pakistan as a bridge between the israeli jewish world and the islamic world. >> is there a question?

>> would you see pakistan been that bridge? >> were you the one i met at the american jewish congress when i spoke there? this is a double answer. reject extremism. for the west and the united states, solve political disputes with the muslim world and assist in the socio-

economic development of the muslim world. within this strategy, i believe we must have peace. if we are going to have peace, we have to resolve the palestinian society dispute. al qaeda and all of this activity with hezbollah and hamas -- they are politically motivated people, those who carried out 9/11. they were probably people who were antagonized at this israel-u.s. relation and anti- palestinian attitudes. as far as i am concerned and as far as pakistan is concerned, we need to have balanced

relations. i commented once that we need to review our relations as we progress forward on the resolution of the palestinian society dispute. i addressed the american jewish congress. i invited the president to invite the foreign minister to turkey and my foreign minister. they should meet. if they come to a dispute resolution, i would like to play a role. in 2006, i initiated a different peace process. on one side, in the muslim world, the united states, they

have become unacceptable to the muslim world. there is someone held in certain esteem in pakistan and the muslim world to play a role. we include non-arab muslim clerics. that was turkey, pakistan, indonesia, and malaysia. i went around to develop this group to deal with the palestine-israeli dispute. israel would have more confidence in the four that i spoke up. and israel would have more confidence. we could make some progress. we have to think out of the box.

i am for peace as far as pakistan is concerned with all countries and trying to resolve all disputes. >> we are running out of time. >> i will take my time because i was late. i will take whatever questions or whatever time you want to take. >> i am from cnn. do you think pakistan is doing enough in working with the international community in securing its nuclear facilities? >> nuclear facilities? >> should they be more open? >> the pakistan nuclear

capability is in direct relation to the perception, to the existential track that pakistan has always pursued. the united states or the other powers that be think pakistan to be denuclearized. that goes against pakistan's interests. the people of pakistan will never allow it. as far as iaea, are they secure?

we suffered in our prestige. after 2000 when i came on the scene, the first thing i did was to establish controls. we created a strategic planning division headed by a general. we took away all of being autonomy from the science organizations. money used to be given to them. security was their own. nobody was overseen.

proliferation was possible. proliferation is no longer possible. i took over those assets. i created an army strategic force command of 20,000 men of the army. it is the core of the army with two divisions with a number of brigades and regiments. the army has disperse them and put them in places that nobody can access. a lot of misconception is there and that india and pakistan were on a confrontation course in 2002. there is no hand on the nuclear

button. in our case, thank god, our weapons are now mated. even during confrontations. there is nothing like a compulsive man. that is not the case. for this long answer, let me say that pakistan's nuclear capability is the pride of pakistan. we go along with the world on all six cards. -- safegaurds.

do not single out pakistan. it will not be acceptable to pakistan. >> may i ask a follow-up? if you are elected president, you would be a civilian leader. under what circumstances will you make a decision to decide, the you have enough weapons? as a civilian, would you have actual authority in that discussion? >> i commanded an army for 40 years. they will never forget that. but that aside, it is not correct that the army controls everything. the chairman is the president of pakistan. the prime minister is there. and appointed ministers are there.

and because it commands in it. when we started this program, it was started in 1954. -- 1974. that made our military strategy. our strategy was a strategy of minimum defensive deterrence. in 1974, this minimum defense and deterrence become untenable. pakistan decided to go nuclear. >> it was in 1972 after the war with bangladesh. after the 71 war was when the program started. >> the nuclear program was always there.

the enrichment of uranium started in 1977 or 1978. in that time, since secrecy was required, it was under the president of pakistan, who happen to be a military man. he used the army commander, the army chief. the course has been following a normal course. the development is through the strategic planning division, which is headed by a retired general.

it is overseen by the nca. this is the best practice that we acquired from the war. that is what we have done. >> this gentleman here and then back there. >> thank you. i do not know what to address u.s. a great general or a great president. as far as afghanistan is concerned, hamid karzai has

accused pakistan of sending terrorism to afghanistan. he was getting all of the billions of dollars. as far as the relations are concerned, the number 1 enemy of pakistan is that india, but the united states. what can you make out of these things? osama bin laden was found in your back yard.

>> thank you very much. first of all, let me thank him. the statement that he would support pakistan against the united states is preposterous. i find this idea very preposterous. is he imagining some kind of war between the united states and pakistan? i would not like to answer this. it is not an insane idea. god forbid. this can never happen. thank you. look after the taliban and al qaeda. pakistan will look after itself.

>> about the u.s. and india. >> you said about osama bin laden being found and antipathy against the united states. that is unfortunate. if you go to the massive level, there is antipathy against the united states. until 1989, we were strategic partners. everything would go through pakistan. it is beyond 1989 that everything happens. the question that was asked of me everywhere i went, what makes you think you would not

be ditched by the united states? this is the question they used to ask me. india is partisan in its approach on nuclear issues. it is the sensitivity of the man in the street. pakistan has developed nuclear bombs because of its existential track. is there a problem with projecting your power in the region and the world? our nuclear is the sense of.

-- defensive. your nucleus may be offensive. yes, pakistan is being told to control and stop its nuclear program. unfortunately, the people of pakistan have developed this antipathy. at the government level, at the leadership level, at the intellectual level, everyone understands the importance of the pakistan-u.s. relationship. pakistan's relations are brought in context. not only is there military cooperation, but there is a socio-economic element in there. everyone understands that the pakistan-united states relationship has to be strong. it is antipathy that needs to be corrected.

it takes time. it takes good leadership. >> osama bin laden. were you surprised? >> yes. he was there for 5 years. i am not convinced that he was there for five years. if he was there for five years, it was not in my tenure. as far as i am concerned, i am 500% sure i did not know. if anyone believes, i do not know. i am clear that there was no complicity. is what clear that the army

would not have hidden this from me. i am from them and they are from me. there are officers who are in touch with me. this is not possible that the army could do anything where they were not calling the policy. >> mr. president, thank you very much. they all love you for hanging in there. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011]

>> secretary of state hillary clinton recently returned from pakistan. she was on capitol hill yesterday to talk with the house committee. she also warned the committee that cutting international spending and tax pakistan and afghanistan, and she says spending is necessary for peace in the region. all of that hearing is available in our video library et c-span.org. libyas investor to the u.s. talks about their revolution in his country today. c-span2 will be live and will cost -- at noon. then, a senate hearing looking into antitrust allegations against google.

also, vice president joe biden is the keynote speaker at a democratic party convention in orlando. c-span to will have the loss of 7:30 p.m. eastern. -- at 7:30 p.m. eastern. >> although the headline proved false, do we's defeat by harry truman was a tonic. tonight, follow the career of thomas dewey, a dominant figure as a three-time governor of new york. "the contenders" live, from the roosevelt hotel in new york city tonight, at 8:00 eastern on c- span. >> i do not want to every story to be 1800 words. >> last month, and jill abramson

became the first woman to hold the post of executive editor of "the new york times pickup she envisions a few changes. >> -- times." she envisions a few changes. >> there is a certain lack of vision. there is a point repeated, or there are three quotes being repeated where one would do. >> she will discuss her career, her new book, and the future of "the new york times." fema director craig fugate says his agency would have had great difficulty responding to an unforeseen disaster because of a lack of funds could he testified before a house subcommittee looking at post-hurricane katrina response. the hearing is about one hour and 20 minutes.

>> good morning. the subcommittee is meeting today to receive testimony from craig fugate on the progress fema has made since the enactment of the post-hurricane katrina reform act five years ago. hi recognize myself for an opening statement. welcome and mr. craig fugate. we appreciate your. before us. -- you appearing before us. fema has had a busy year with a record number of major disaster declarations. you have responded to tornadoes, hurricanes, flooding, while fires, and severe winter storms. a number of members of congress on this committee represented

areas impacted by natural disasters this year, and we thank you for all of fema's efforts. this is a follow-up on a hearing the subcommittee held in clearwater, florida, my district, in june, it did which we received testimony from state and local emergency management officials and the red cross. witnesses gave their perspective on the reform effort and working with fema. they let us know what is working well, and gave us their suggestions for improvements that could be made. today, we continue that discussion with the administrator fugate. i am pleased to note that your response to these recent disasters has received positive feedback from the members and emergency management officials with whom i have spoken.

that is good news, and is in some cases, due to the authority of the post-katrina emergency action reform act which was signed into law just over five years ago, october 4, 2006, i think we can all agree that fema has come a long way since hurricane katrina. of course, we know there is always room for improvement. administrator fugate, i am particularly interested in your assessment of what is working well with fema, when requirements could be working better, and what new authorities would enhance your authority to prepare for, respond, and assist in recovery from disasters. also worth discussing it is mid in damages before disaster strikes, and i am -- mitigating damages before disaster

strikes, and i am pleased you mention this in your written statement to read as ben franklin said, "announced -- statement. as ben franklin said, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. these efforts can help to reduce loss of life, property damage, speed recovery, and also save money in the long run. administrator few date, thank you again for appearing here today -- administrator fugate, thank you for appearing here today and i look forward to your testimony. we now recognize mrs. richardson for any statements she may have. >> good morning. thank you for convening this hearing. i would also like to think

administrator fugate for appearing before the subcommittee today. i look forward to your assessment of the local help present capability to manage response efforts. we're here today because just over six years ago hurricane katrina ravished the gulf coast and was a sobering test of our emergency management system. history reports that fema failed the test and as a nation we learned how to acquit the government was to manage disaster activities. determine who was in charge, who should coordinate efforts, what resources are available, and how to acquire needed supplies efficiently was not done well. in the meantime, the nation watched television coverage of this horrific disaster. ironically, television news crews or able to get to the scene, but relief supplies were not. in response, congress enacted

the reform act, and though not perfect, it made changes, streamlining the emergency preparedness and response operations by consolidating all components of the emergency management system into the federal emergency management agency. it established a clear chain of command for disaster response activities by giving him a federal court made officer statutory authority to head response admission. it directed fema to administer grants and guidance to state and local governments to improve their prepared this capability is, and it established something you have been known for implementing, administrator fugate, 10 offices charged with coordinating with government and non-governmental organizations to coordinate response plans. the post katrina emergency

respond -- response act delegated you to ensure that a vulnerable operations have access to and knowledge of the means to evacuate and other sources in the event of a major disaster. under your leadership, the mayor has made -- under your leadership, fema has made progress for example, you've taken significant steps in integrating the public warning system, which i am a strong proponent of. that will facilitate defect of public warnings. these warnings will give people like those in american samoa, the opportunity to seek safe sell its to shelter in the wake of a major disaster. despite the progress five years after the enactment, a significant gaps remain in our comprehensive emergency

response system. i am concerned a combination of budget cuts and other obstacles will hinder our ability to realize our preparedness and goal. another issue that is important to me is one i would like to address specifically regarding the disability coordinator, and whether that coordinator has the resources to carry out the responsibilities of the sector this quarter was appointed the -- of this act. the coordinator was appointed in june, 2009. there was no request for additional funding in the full year 2012 additional budget request. i am concerned this budgetary about might be the clearest sign of the priority fema places on this office. i would be interested to hear your comments on this issue and others as this hearing progresses. thank you for being here tie

afford to your testimony. >> thank you. i now recognize mr. thompson. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you for holding this hearing to review the post- katrina emergency management reform. a perfect storm is a popular expression that describes events where isolated conditions merge to create a worsening situation. katrina was it perfect storm. her came katrina's devastation of the gulf coast -- hurricane to trim output the devastation of the gulf coast relieve a structure that was disorganized, all uncoordinated, and seemed and caring. in the aftermath of the storm, and numerous investigations led to suggested changes in the organizational structure and the culture of fema. these changes were not to be merely window dressing. do not clearly needed to find ways to fulfill its mission,

improve disaster response, and regain the trust of american people. congress acted and passed it, and five years after the passage, i think we can all agree that fear the's implementation is a mixed bag improvements -- bag. improvements remain, but challenges -- improvements were made, but challenges remain. i look forward to hearing this testimony. before we get to mr. fugate, i want to take this opportunity to talk about disaster relief. i hope we can all agree that it should never be held hostage to political ideology. when a hurricane, while fire, or earthquake strikes a community, it does not act without party affiliation. this is why i was troubled to read the someone on the other side of the aisle was accusing

this administration of accusing the process as a way to turn low-cost storms into federal disasters. instead of addressing the underlying needs to assure adequate money in the disaster relief fund, claims are being made that the act of declaring a disaster is some kind of political game. they are saying that declaring a disaster it is simply a way to drain fema's aid from the federal government. and, cover to fema from preparing for catastrophic events. these are conspiracy theories worthy of a novel. before we began this hearing, let me set the record straight. in 2010, there were 81 major disaster declarations. in 2009, there were 59. while the numbers are clear, the

reasons for the increases are subject to interpretation. it could be more happened because more disasters have happened, or because more declarations have happened because states and budgets are seeking disaster assistance. it is not likely that fema is forcing states to take disaster declaration funding. whatever the reason, a compassionate congress would hear the cry of those who lost everything and provide help. instead, this congress has called for fiscal discipline fema's budget for management and prepared this program has decreased. it was reduced by $10 million between fiscal year 2010 and fiscal year 2011. the disaster litigation fund was cut from $100 million in 2010,

to $50 million in 2011. the grant program director was cut from 4.16 $5 billion to two 3.3 $8 billion in 2011. this is not sustainable. as we move forward, i am hopeful we can focus on the facts and provide the help people in the united states truly need. mr. chairman, thank you for calling today's hearing. >> thank you, mr. thompson. other members are reminded that opening statements may be submitted for the record. i am pleased to once again the welcome administrator fugate. mr. fugate was appointed by president obama to serve as the administrator of the federal emergency management agency and was confirmed by the u.s. senate on may 13, 2009. prior to fema, he served as the director of the florida division

of emergency management, a position here it -- held for eight years. he began his emergency management career as a volunteer firefighter, and finally it as a lieutenant. your written statement will appear in the record. i asked that you' summarize your testimony perdu are now recognized. >> thank you, mr. chairman. staff spent time coming up with facts and figures on how we got better and how we have improved under the post-katrina emergency management reform act. after i read it, i took the approach that i heard today. we have done a lot bill -- we have done a lot, but we need to do more. one of the key things that came out of post-katrina emergency management reform act, is we

were able to move away from utilizing only the stafford act as it will. that is important. if you look to the stafford act, you must wait until you have a request from the government, it has to go through the process, and then you begin the elements of that response. as we saw in katrina, and other disasters up and down the seaboard this year, across numerous river floods that reached records, if you wait until it is that bad, the response will take time. this is one of the things we spend time in fema trying to educate our own staff. we no longer start with the stafford act. post-katrina emergency management reform act establishes our mission, and our structure, including the regional office structure, and clearly defines many activities that we are to engage in and prepare for, and rupert respond

and give activities. -- and respond and mitigate activities. year and the likelihood an event would require federal assistance, the federal government must not wait until a federal request to identify as they are overwhelmed. it says we shall be prepared and will begin response with the tools we have, including the ability to use as ranking member thompson spoke about, the disaster relief fund. that is prior to the president getting a formal request from the government. -- governor. this might seem bureaucratic, but if you wait until you see how bad something is, you have lost time. you have to anticipate needs, not waiting for formal assessments or until the full impact are realized. other assets -- aspect allows us to do things such as pre-staging

teams or equipment in areas we think might need help. if you look at what happened with hurricane irene, we were starting of the virgin islands and pr. as it approached the u.s. east coast, we did not wait until the state's informal requests. we were able to send teams in. we were able to make decisions about evacuation's and sheltering, and not wait until they are hit. that ability to have teams in place, to really work across the federal enterprise with our state partners and integrate in our volunteers and start to increase and be able to integrate the private sector, particularly those that provide goods and services, so we're not duplicating what they do best, but focusing on the areas where they expect significant outages

or challenges. that response sped up, in many cases, the time from when an incident happened to when actual results were happening. resources were available. this is one of the things we continue to focus on. the post-katrina emergency management reform act gives us speed, not haste. i would be remiss if i said this was entirely 8 fema effort. much of the response we saw in the tornadoes, and television, the search and rescue teams, the mobile communications command post -- all of that response was generated through state and local resources, mutually paid for, built, train, and exercised with the prepared this dollars this country has been investing since 9/11. if those dollars have not been invested, the response this

spring were the best lead different because those local teams would not have been there. the equipment would come from further away. we went ahead to employ more assets to those disasters -- we would have had to win quite more assets to those disasters. oftentimes, they give us little warning. rescue workers and seems across state lines were on the ground, doing their job. we were able to focus quickly on the recovery challenges that were going to be faced by these communities. if anything else, the legacy of this act is to speed up the process and make sure we work as a better-integrating team with a clarity that we do not have to wait until everyone is overwhelmed until we begin response. >> thank you very much. i have a couple of questions. i will recognize myself for five minutes.

steve has made strides. what lessons have we learned -- fema has made strides. what lessons have we learned about gaps in our capabilities, and what additional authority to further develop the response capacity? >> i am not sure yet about additional authorities, but i know there are some areas we are working on, and this comes back to technology. we have been working with ed g.o. spatial nga in providing us better information. our ability to get information before people get on the ground can help the team make better decisions. this is an area where we have a tendency to wait until we are down in an area to get information. we are waiting for things to come up through official channels when they are busy responding. if two things we are focused on is how do we get information

from various types of sensors platforms, and on the other hand, how we get more information from the public? this is one of the things i've seen more and more of. often times will getting faster and more accurate information from people that were sending out everything from social media to local and national news media, a sendinguplinks of those disasters. looking at that, i am seeing a lot of damage. how can we do this in a way that is actionable, and speed up the response? the faster we are able to adjust to those issues, the better the responses. it is one of the challenges when we look at how the public shares of for mission, how they communicate, and are we listening? the combined with the capabilities we now have working with nga and how to use information to put together a better operating pictures so we

are responding better. >> to as part of the national prepared this system, -- prepared in this system -- preparedness system, thin the recently released the national disaster recovery -- fema recently released the national discovery -- disaster recovery effort. what is the status of this review and fema's role in the other frameworks? >> the status is on going. we of various delivery dates that are published. the national disaster re- recovery framework was in its inception. the national response framework and the other frameworks will be updated as we go through the process of implementing ppda.

fema has been charged with the coordination role, but some of those goals will lead to be managed by other agencies that are more focused on some of those activities. we have the overall response ability to coordinate all those responsibilities. >> thank you. this year, the sub committee held a hearing on the ipas program. i am also a supporter. would you provide an update on the status of a plan, and when you and the chairman and mayor bloomberg unveil the program, the intent was for the program to be operational in new york and washington d.c. by the city to of the year. give us the status. are we on track -- by the end of

the year. give us the status. are we on track? >> but we start with the cooperation with the sec out of the chairman and i have been working closely on this and other operations. there are a lot of activities that think we have built a good partnership. we are working in their role as a regulatory dealing with licensed carriers in the broadcast industry and our role with the warning systems. as far as i know, things are on track. what of the things we had hoped that we are seeing is there is a time frame for industry to adopt as we published the rules, the technology to the plan so you have the personal capabilities we are seeing industry adopt the capabilities. we are seeing the industry adopt to that. i will go back and get an update on the status of all of those. >> please do. i'm very interested. i know the ranking member is, too. i yield five minutes to the

ranking member, representative richardson. >> thank you. as i said, administrator fugate , in each region is there a person responsible for disability cord mission? >> as far as i know, i think we finished higher in the last one. several of them, in effect, in recent disasters, they have been deployed into those joint field offices. most recently, the recent higher in region four, which is based in atlanta, was deployed into north carolina, which was a tremendous asset. >> is that the person's sole responsibility in each region? >> it is their primary responsibility. we also like to remind ourselves we are all emergency managers and we do we have to do during a disaster. their primary responsibility is looking at being inclusive

across programs. not only do it externally at our response functions, but our own practices to make sure we are inclusive. >> what else are those individuals responsible for? >> i would not be aware of any additional specific testing, but i could get that in writing. >> ok. i would like to know specifically if there is a specific person responsible for disability coordination in each region, and if so, what percentage of their work is inclusive in doing that, and of their other work, what is that, and how much time does that take? the disability coordinator has a budget of approximately one and $50,000. what is used for that? >> -- $150,000. what is used for that? >> i am not sure that is the full extent. we hosted a conference that was far in excess of that. the chairman spoke at that.

with upload these folks out. don -- we have deployed these folks out. when the things we need to look at is is is reflective of all the money across various programs, or is this just one part? i would like to get it back to you in writing pad i did not as for a line item. we took a lot of these -- riding. i did not ask for a line item. we basically got different parts of fema to provide resources. >> ok. we look forward to that in writing. the directors of the largest amount of someone outside of samoa. what current emergency system to the have their right now? goinglast i knew, we're to the testing phase of the siren system. that was a concern we had after a tsunami. there have been previous studies but they had not implemented the warning system.

i do not know if we have certified it yet. that was to address the issue of not having island-wide warning, which happened when they were hit with the tsunami in 2009. >> at our july hearing, the need was identified to increase training for emergency managers. what status have you taken off to increase training, and further, it is my understanding there is a test of the emergency alert system scheduled for november 9, 2011, although i understand the test is not a pass/fail, i am interested in knowing how it will be evaluated. can you speak to that? >> i will ask for the update on trading. i know they have been doing more training. regarding the national emergency alert test, this is the first test outside of alaska of an

emergency alert notification in the history of the system. it is never received a national test. this will be the first time that we will begin the activation as an emergency action notification from the white house says the origination, and we will utilize this to look at how the system performs, and all the messages. out. because this is a legacy system, it does not have a test function. we are using the alert notification message. had it is important that we announced people -- it is important that we announce to people is just a test, and this would be the first test on a national basis. >> mr. fugate, although we can all make improvements, it has been very assuring to see you at the numerous disasters we have

had. he a very proactive, very visible, providing the you have been very proactive, very visible, -- you have been very proactive, very visible, and i want to thank you personally for your work toward >> i now recognize the ranking member mr. thompson for five minutes. >> thank you. i would like to echo the sentiments of miss richardson. i have been here pre-katrina, post-katrina, and i have seen a different simfema. obviously, it is always a work in progress, but i have never seen you as administrators not address whatever problem you are presented with. thank you for that. just for the record, mr. fugate, just so the public understands

that a declaration from the presidential level is only after the state and local requirements, based on some kind of requests, has been made. can you kind of walk us ought that change? >> yes, sir. this goes back through -- to the stafford act. only a governor is authorized to request a disaster declaration from the president, and that is based upon the governor certifying that the event has overwhelmed state and local abilities. we look at impact on a per- capita basis to determine part of that, but it is not the sole determination. it can often times be based of the significant impact of what the trauma is to the committee. in assistance -- in addition, we

look individual assistance. it is based on the overall impact of the state and the size of that state. you will see a disaster is declared in much smaller states because of the population than in a much larger state you would assume to have more resources. it is always based upon the governor to certify and that this exceeds their capabilities and their formally requesting -- they are formally requesting the president declares it is a disaster. >> so, the president, by law, cannot do it without a request from the governor? >> the president has some limited capabilities, but in most cases, the only time we have responded is when a governor has made that request. >> thank you. if, in fact, fema, in its repositioning and mobilization

efforts, was limited in doing so based on some standard offset, what would that do to fema's ability to respond to a wild fire, hurricane, tornado, is then offset had to be identified before you would be able to move? >> to be honest with you, sir, i am looking at the fund balance and how the money gets there is secondary to that. what i did see as we approach the end of our current fiscal year of last year, our response funds dropped to levels would have extremely compromise us in our ability to respond. we look at the various options. when the balance drops below a certain amount, and that amount

is oftentimes up to about $1 billion, when you look at the cost and the response to the large-scale threats the country faces whether it is a earthquake or a hurricane, response cost is not in the tens or hundreds of millions. it could escalate into billions of dollars. on our exercise we did this year, the initial estimates were $1.5 billion. when you are sitting there with funds of only $100 million or so, it begs the question how we will respond to the next catastrophic disaster? that is one of my greatest concerns. we should not look at the fund for the disasters that have already been declared, but for the next no-notice disaster we need to be prepared for. >> to what extent have you directed your staff close out

past disasters that are still on the books? >> we of taken the shared approach. our first goal in looking at mission assignments from previous disasters that the federal agencies completed but they still have fund balances. but returned to billion dollars last year. the next -- that returns two billion dollars last year. the next step is looking at projects that have been completed the the stakes were no longer drawing funds for. we were able to recover over $1.5 billion the past year. as we get to those recoveries, we will start looking at these older disasters which still require financial leakage -- reconciliation. our first goal is to get money that was obligated but was not going to be used so we can

continue paying for more recent disasters. >> just for the record, can you provide the committee with a status report on those disasters that are still open, whenever the accounting is? >> yes, sir. >> i yield back. to record >> i checked -- hi -- i recognize mr. marino, who was effected by the storm's progre -- storms. >> thank you. we have communications during hurricane irene and i see pat sitting behind you. he is quite the trooper. he was on the phone with me one dozen times when we need water, food, strategic changes made. i want to thank him for the services he provides a. i still read your cell phone

number, and i will take advantage. you brought up a good point on been notified. just briefly, go into how important it is for states to be in touch with fema, so you can get on the ground running? there are many indications that you did not have that in katrina. there are also indications that the requests were not asked, or not ask for it in time. how important is it? >> i think it is set to be critical. all lessons i have learned over history is that when we are dealing with these events -- i will break this into two pieces, those that are recoveries, and those that are an active response such as hurricane irene. it is hard to be effective if you are always identified yourself as a local, state, fema, or federal person. you have to get in there as one

team and be responsive in anticipating needs as opposed to waiting for things to get so bad. that is one of the hallmarks of the post-katrina emergency management reform act -- really getting rid of these artificial divisions, when it hit that level, we have to work as one team, and we should be literally passing paper up the food chain appeared we should be able to work together and solve problems quickly. >> do you have the ability to step up even if a state fails and say, "we see this as a disaster and we need to assist you in doing preventive measures? do you have that authority as far as your concern? >> we can do quite a bit without a formal request from the governor to pre position supplies and move resources in, but i do not know. you are getting into a constitutional question. as we reserve police powers for

the states under article 10 of the constitution, we can take some action, but again, we find it better to get our team in there with the state and work for those challenges behind the doors to get this thing is done versus waiting until people fail. i would say that our goal is to get there early, work with the state, anticipate needs, and where we can, advise and help get to a better decision faster. >> i will certainly be supporting you in that aspect, and if we need more legislation, i will be taking the need to -- the lead with you on that as well. i know we did a lot of things right in irene. my district is an example of it. i have never seen the fed, state, and locals work so closely to gather, but tell me when you realized from this last round, what was not effective, and what can we do differently? >> i will pick on one aspect of

this because it is going to come up, particularly when we deal with flood events, looking at the national flood insurance program. one of our challenge is -- one of our challenges is if we have areas that choose not to participate, it impedes our ability to help individual spirit it oftentimes puts us in a bind where people have been flooded. they have losses. their neighboring communities are getting assistance, but they cannot because their community did not adopt the national flood insurance program. to me, it would make more sense to put the burden back on the local governments and look at their public assistance. i realize with the flood insurance program, our goal is to the people at risk to purchase flood insurance and have that protection so the taxpayer does not have to pay for flood damages, but it is an area where it will be difficult.

it is part of why we have to send out remittances when we provide assistance to people and it turns out they were not in a flood insurance protected area. that is a very difficult proposition when we get to that point. >> i know you need the funding. i was the one who stood in the house and said, "let's not argue. let's just get the funding out." my district appreciated it. there are a number of areas that deserve to be cut, and those funds we can hopefully make certain you have so you can serve so well as you have in the past. thank you so much. i yelled back. >> thank you. i now recognize the gentleman from michigan, mr. clark, for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chair. i appreciate you being here. i represent metropolitan the

trait, which includes the northern border with canada as well. my first question includes promoting interoperable of the among communications with our first responders as well as with our federal officials along with our canadian counterparts. let me just illustrate that. according to one of our local law enforcement first responders, a few years ago, there was an accident on the detroit river. the first responder had a hard time communicating to the coast guard about it, and in turn, none of them could notify their canadian counterparts. as a result of the new law in 2008, and fema establishing emergency communication divisions, how does this help coordinate response on the

northern border or could it be used to coordinate a response on the northern border in a way that would foster interoperable communications among first responders with their canadian counterparts and the federal authorities? >> let's start with the disaster emergency communication function. it does two things. it helps to bring in an reestablish communication in to local, state, and regional jurisdictions that have lost it. it helps states to develop their communication plans. i will be honest with you -- those have been state-centric. the question you raised is interesting because i notice the secretary has been working across the enterprise to look at how we worked the cross border issues that are transnational, but in a response world, first responders can see each other across the river. how do you get better integration there? i know that our regional five administrators working with your shop on this, but it is one

area i would like to take back as a concern you have raised and look at how our plans, which are focused on the states, can be tied into more activities at dhs. we know that first responders are working across the border, and i think that is an area that we will go back to the secretary and say this might be an area where these committees could work closely and there might be other avenues to work with our canadian counterparts. >> thank you very much. i have one other question that deals with how we can best prepare citizens who are struggling right now financially to be prepared in case there is a disaster. in the city of detroit, we have lost more jobs, more regions, more people, more homes than any other region in the country.

in downtown detroit in particular, we have many people that have special needs who may be physically challenged, get around with wheelchairs' or other types of devices to help them with their mobility. we also have folks who are struggling every day just to provide for their own basic needs, both financially do not have the money to do so. how can fema helped better prepare individuals who are struggling right now to be able to be prepared for a disaster? >> not to sound trite about this, but i think we ought to keep the entry-level into being fully prepared so expensive. we have made it such a high bar that we want to go back and start with more basic questions. again, your office and books can help get this sorted out. you do not have to make sure you have everything, but start with

the most basic thing -- do you have a family communication plan? most folks are very mobile. they use mobile communications devices. they use cell phones and not have anything else. they have a plan of what to do -- as we saw with the earthquake, you will not have a dial tone. do you have it back a plan with text messages, or a meeting place where to go. how will you let friends and family know? where will you go if you cannot get home? those initial steps are in process. one of the things we have been working with our state partners on -- durable medical goods and other supplies that may be needed for people that have additional resource needs. we are trying to focus on making sure we are inclusive on the front end, not treating this as an afterthought, of dealing with people who may need additional resources when a disaster strikes. >> thank you.

>> we have been plagued in taxes by wildfires for the past year. of the disasters fema faces, wild fires are ones that can be mitigated while they are going on. i have a two-part question for you to begin with -- first, can you outline what fema's responses have been to the wild fires in texas? and how has fema and the federal government as a whole cooperated on bringing the resources necessary to mitigate those fires as they are going on and afterwards? >> the two pieces of this -- i will start with the last one first. the lead agency for coordinating federal assistance -- we support them there. on the other side, the financial

side, has been through the issuance of a record number of fire management grants that are fire specific as well as a major presidential disaster declaration focused on individual assistance. in some of the most recent fires, we lost a large number of homes here in texas, the wild fires are merely a symptom of a sustained long drought that does not seem to be ending. one of the findings, our fire management grant programs are designed around very large, centralized fire. in texas, we have a lot of little fires that if you do not get them knocked out quick will grow into a big fire. there is a quieter -- quite a lot of activity going on in texas. i've had discussions with the department of emergency management and asked my staff to look at some of these issues. my concern is this is not a situation that is improving. it is the underlying drought, and until that breaks, my concern is the wild fire

situation in texas will continue to be active, and we have to look at our tools on providing assistance, both through our interagency process with the u.s. forest service as well as the financial assistance through financial grants. >> short of praying for rain, i would appreciate if you and your staff could get with my office and the rest of the texas delegation to see what if anything can be done to improve that situation. i also want to move over to the eas for just a second and shift gears. you have the test coming up. i would imagine, having been in broadcasting since i was 16 years old, i have seen firsthand the flaws of the ebs what it has evolved into. is fema looking into with the advent of new technologies like cell phones and the internet, text messages, coming up with technology to replace or supplement it?

>> yes, that was some of the remarks that the ranking member and the chairman were talking about, what we call integrated public warning and alert systems. it takes advantage of modern technology and uses a common protocol to go across all devices. part of this is working with the fcc were notifications can be tagged to your cell phone based on your location appeared as well as the ability to operate across a lot of different technologies. >> my concern is as we saw in the if we, the cell phone network, especially in times of disaster, is substantially more fragile than we would like to believe. >> that is correct. again, if we were trying to use cell phones for the way you would be doing voice traffic, it would not work, but they are also radios, and the towers have broadcast functions that you can send 1-way transmissions to. that is the benefit of that.

the other benefit is rather than alerting everyone in an area, we can specify those geo-it to the threat. member for tornadoes when we had to lick the whole county? it is based upon the phone knowing where it is at. we do not track that information. it just tells everything in that our area to alert, and it does not track the actual bones. the phones are self-aware, but the system does not monitor the phones. it just broadcast to the specific area. >> thank you for your hard work. i will yield back. >> thank you. i would like to recognize the gentle lady from new york for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. we are talking about personal notification systems, how you can give information to the public. what troubles me is that the public is not able to send 8911 text message to public safety

dispatchers here whether it is a natural disaster or the situation we had at virginia tech, whether there are children, youngsters in a lockdown situation, and they are sending messages on their cell phones, believing fully that they are going to be heard. and we do not have the capability. i find that to be a national embarrassment, personally. i am not dispersing blame. i'm just asking how we solve that. when i talk to people at fcc this as his homeland security. homeland security says it is fcc. there is a generation with the expectation is when they sent 911 on their cell phone, it will be received by someone in a position to help them, and sadly, that is not the case in america today. >> i want to ask my staff to give a response back in writing. i share your concerns. i know they have been working on what they call next generation

911 and have been looking at pilot programs on how you can start taking in text messaging and other types of social media appeared one of the challenges the system was never designed with that capability. i know they are looking at preliminary rule making, looking at pilots, and i will ask my staff to work with them so we can respond to you what they are looking at in the next generation, which they are anticipating how you adapt to the known but also emerging technologies that we may not quite understand. it is a common idea. we have to adapt to the way the public communicates, not necessarily force them into the systems, so that is one of the challenges as we move forward. >> i appreciate your attention to that, and i would urge you to make that a priority. in national disasters or lock down situations or any time the public needs help, they are assuming they are reaching us. we had a situation where gunshots were fired in one of my

suburban high schools in rochester. 50 kids sent 911 messages and thought they were received. i would urge this to be made a priority. you're talking about pilot programs, and i will sign up right now. i've sat down with many of my public dispatch operations, and they are ready to do it. they just need the resources to get it going. i commend you on your attention. you have so many issues to pay attention to. so many disasters and expected. i want to make sure we do not lose sight of some disaster. i can give you a copy again. this was mailed out from our new york delegation asking for assistance. if you could please commit to reevaluating the governor's request to reverse your denial of assistance to areas that were flooded in the spring. i still have farmers that will never be whole again. my economy relies on farmers' planting, harvesting, getting to

market. if he could take another look at that as well. and you probably have the toughest job in america, with all the different disasters that come your way. who would have thought upstate new york would be a victim to an earthquake, a hurricane, a tornado all within a couple of weeks? we are living in -- it seems like unprecedented times, but i hope that you are up to the task. >> thank you. the gentle lady will yield back? ok, it it is alright with administrator puget i think this is such an important topic that we have time for another round. as part of your effort to engage with the whole community, and i commend you, you have a rotating seat with a private sector of the national response coordination center. how's that working? >> it is working very well. not only are we getting the private sector a seat, but we're

looking at the things that will speed up our ability to see what they see. we're looking at the major big blocks stores, recognizing they do not provide everything, but they are a good indicator of how areas are impacted, giving us live data on store openings and closures so we can see what is going on. we first saw this when we were dealing with the ice storm earlier this year. kind of hard to remember that far back, but they were literally giving us updates on store status is in real time as we were making decisions about where we may need generators. we saw this again when irene hi. t they were able to give us statices a drug stores, hardware stores that told us the bulk of services were intact and our focus was on flooding in some of the higher elevations. that is real time information that made us more comfortable with the decision that the

governor's request was not for more resources, but focus on the recovery so we could shift those attentions to the east coast of the united states. without that, we would have been concerned that we did not have that information, and what if we did send supplies were we got behind? retailers were assuring us they were up, they were running. that information, coupled with the governor's request, made sense, and we were able to shift resources to the east coast. >> emergency management officials have spoken, and the engagement with the pri -- with the private sector is a positive step, but they have expressed concern about the prep program. they are concerned that while fema has structure in place for the program, it has yet to create the incentive for bridges a patient with the private sector, recognizing that it is a voluntary program. what can we do to better engage the private sector and encourage them to take steps to enhance

their preparedness? >> i think when that was starting out, we were looking at the private sector as getting a certification to be able to sit at the table. in some ways, what we found is that there should be an entry requirement to be part of the team. they are doing it already. i think it is going through an evolution. i will ask my staff to come back to you with more specifics, but one of the things that i learned in this process is oftentimes when we start programs with good intentions, we find that we are not going the way we thought we would be. i think this is a continued area of how we reassess the program to get better participation, at the same time recognizing there may be some entities that will not participate there but will still be part of the team when we respond and recover from disasters. >> if you have some suggestions for us as well where we can work

with our constituents, i think that would be very beneficial as well. i am interested in your assessment of the national level exercise 11. what are the main lessons learned from the exercise? how are we sharing these lessons with participants at the state, local, tribal, and private sector levels? >> i would like to give you some written responses to that, but i want to point out one thing that i really have not had a chance to talk about in these committees, but i think has been a tremendous improvement in our capability, and that is resolution of the issue of applying federal forces to a state, particularly active duty forces, when the governor has national guard on active duty, and running the realities of how you manage that. under a program that was initiated by congress forming the council of governors to work with the national guard and governors as well as with department of defense, we have what we called the will statice

commanders. this is a program that has been enthusiastically supported, i must say, by the department of defense to take flag officers in almost all the states and train them as dual status command where they can now command at the request of the governor and the designation by the secretary of defense by the present, command but state active duty national guard and national forces under one commander, not having to have two separate joint task force -- two separate joint task forces. the ability to bring in federal forces in support of the state along with their national guard minimize the confusion and duplicity of having multiple joint task forces operating in the same state. i think this is one of the things that we were able to look at an exercise, but i think it is one of the huge, unheralded milestones we have in this country of resolving once and for all the issue of how we bring active duty forces to the

governor in a way that does not duplicate or replicate what they are doing. >> thank you. i recognize a ranking member richardson for 5 minutes. >> thank you. i need to come back to the eas test. does it include all the territories and all the states, everyone, or just -- >> my assumption is yes. this will be an activation of the emergency alert notification. in the standing as it should go out through all of the systems, but i will verify that. we have done two separate state test in alaska to test the system, but this will be the first time we will be activating it across the entire country, and i will verify that it will go through the territories. >> if it does not, are you committed to including them? >> absolutely. it has more to do with legacy

systems than by any intention. this is one of the things we are hoping to get past some of the legacy limitations in our existing infrastructure. >> ok, and when we were talking about american samoa and their alert system test, was this one in the same, or were they having a separate test? >> this was a separate test certifying the out door warning system. this was a key component that when the tsunami warning center issues warnings, there was no outdoor warning systems in american samoa. it was a testing of that system. >> has that already occurred? >> i do not know if they have completed the test. i'll have to back you. i do not have that at my fingertips. >> back also about the eas as i said, i do not believe it includes a pass or fail. can you tell us how the data will be gathered, what will be

improvements to the system made, and is there a specific time line you have associated? >> the test itself will be looking at through all of the primary entry points for the system, activate the local primaries, and how many of those stations that are supposed to -- one of the things about the emergency alert system as it is always voluntary except when a presidential notification occurs. this is the only one that will trip everything because it is designed to automatically engage all of the retransmit functions. the test will be how far did it go and where were their gaps in the chain of notification? it starts a chain in primary points, which will then activate other receivers. because this was the one function that was built in that broadcasters are option on everything else, and they can set their equipment to manual or delay, this will be the first time we see if all of the systems go through. the first part will be did that

happen and were their brakes? the other part is that as that goes out, did we see any difficulties? we know some issues germane to the legacy systems that will be a challenge to this. >> will your assessment will include improvements that need to be made? >> yes. >> do you have a specific time line when you anticipate being able to give us this report? >> i will refer back to david to get an update on what we expect to get back on that when we have a report. >> i have three really quick questions. >> i will give you more time. >> one of the issues i found in american samoa was that they owe prior money to the government and because of that were hesitant of extending on additional services beyond the initial whatever it was -- 72 hours. have you established a new process, or have we had a discussion of how to deal with states or territories that might

have a past due situation? >> the issue of those that still owe money from previous disasters or previous grant programs is one we are looking at of the recruitment process. we know it will be a challenge in american samoa. there are also other territories facing the same situation. it is similar to other processes where if the money under the general accounting office's finds that money is owed back, we have to look at a collection process that will either offset future costs or has to be tied to future funding. >> if you could supply the community of who currently owes, how much they owe, what is the process of paying it back. twice now we have had colleagues who brought forward a concern about the grants and whether the funding should be in tiered levels and so on. could you please share your particular feedback of what you think it should stay the same or

change? >> again, as we presented the options to secretary appalling tunnel, she made the decision that we could no longer continue to fund all the cities on the list and needed to focus on those that were in the top tier, based on a variety of information we use in making those decisions. given the amount of funding, i think that will be the continued recommendation as we present to her this year as we look at this year's appropriation, the decision to fully fund top tier cities compared to increasing funding across the board. >> if you're sorry hearing you correctly, if we were not to reduce funding, which some folks on this committee have advocated for, we might have a better ability to assist all the cities? >> that would be an option to look at, yes, ma'am. >> before year -- for full year 2012, the proposed level of funding for first responders is less than half the amount that congress appropriated two years ago in 2010. congress appropriated a total of $4.17 billion in brand

funding for first responders. further, as enacted by congress, the grant funding will have been reduced by almost 60% within two fiscal cycles. how do you plan on addressing these cuts and to ensure that the regions have adequate resources? i am asking this on the record and intend to bring it back up when the committee does discuss things like cutting what i believe are very reasonable levels. >> the short answer is that with these reductions in funding, we are looking at what we can do to maintain current capabilities and putting emphasis on the items and teams that are more critical to the national interest and of national capabilities, which means not everything will be funded and there may have to be decisions about what cannot be supported. but looking at things that are really designed to be of a national interest and have capability to support the national trust.

as we saw in past disasters, one of the things we know is making sure that regional mutual aid through state-directed responses is the most effective use of these resources, looking at how we can leverage more regional response capabilities with fewer dollars. >> if you could provide to this committee what i alighted the proposed cuts -- what you've you would fall within the national whelm of being of national interest, and what potential things could be cut in the event we have to operate at the levels you have been given. >> we will do that. >> thank you, sir. >> thank you very much, mr. chair. will you comment on your efforts to get fema to start buying locally in disasters and

whether or not that effort has rendered a positive result? >> yes, sir. one of the things we found is that we used a lot of national contracts, one size fits all. it is easy for us to administer, but it tended to result in less buying things and bringing things from outside a disaster area when they were already there in the community. when i served in haiti, i realized one of the flaws in my system was that we were not putting money back into the local economy when it was the greatest need, so we adopted a policy of buying local and hiring local whenever possible to put money back into the local community in many cases at no real additional cost to the taxpayers and sometimes a savings because it is faster and it is right there. right now, it has been mixed, but i think it is significant in that we can go to a local

computer store or a local vendor or print shop and buy services for people in the area trying to get their lives back together. what i know from all of the things i have seen, small businesses are the most vulnerable, and if they do not get work quickly, they do not survive. i figure as best we can, if we can buy local services wherever possible, we will benefit not only the community itself but ultimately speed the recovery. >> thank you. there have been some titles six issues in fema on an ongoing basis. provide us with your efforts to resolve many of these issues please. >> first of all, it comes back with one of the things we are looking at is we have a remediation going on in florida. what we have worked with on this one -- i think what we are going to do is go back and do remedial

training and provide them additional grant guidance oversight if they are issuing the grants for title 6. we also put into our office of fraud investigations the title six functions for investigating those complaints. again, we felt this needed to be more focused on those complaints when they came up. i think it is two parts. one is the enforcement peace. the other part is the education to make sure on the front end and providing grant guidance people understand the requirements and are complying with that, particularly these large projects. thank you. >> can you provide the committee with some current statistics on compliance and what have you, say, over the last two years? just come back to us with it and give us how many have been

resolved, how many are ongoing, this kind of thing? you have looked at the situation and whether or not you will recommend changes or what have you going forward. i think it would be helpful. with respect to recruitment, i could not expect you to get away without the issue of recruitment. we are still, i guess, weekly getting dinged by constituents who are receiving letters. two questions. to what extent can the other constituents expect these letters to come? on the other hand, especially for the katrina victims, a disproportionate number of people have been misplaced.

that addresses, things like that. i would like to see whether or not with letters go out, and those individuals were moved to houston from new orleans and subsequently somewhere else, that basically, through no fault of their own, but obviously, from an address standpoint, you still have them in houston. i would not want somebody who has really resettled, getting themselves back together, and now, all of a sudden, because they did not get a letter, they would, in fact, be breaking the law. if you come up with a solution for that, if not, when you do, it would be very helpful to

people like me who have constituents getting those letters. >> yes, sir, there will be more letters. that is still an absolute fact. there are still a lot more to go out. we sent a letter to a last known address. when that letter comes back, what do we do? i have asked staff, and what the brief me on is we have a process to try to track down any additional financial records to try to locate the person. one of the concerns i know that was raised was when with penalties and interest kick in, and when do you refer them to treasury for collection? that is the area where i do not have an exact time line because i do not know what we do as far as how long it takes for us to go through diligent in trying to locate them. it is generally because they are not responsive or we have exhausted our ways of locating them that what they would get referred to treasury. as you point out, when they sent a letter, the first that is to see if they are going to appeal that and if there was

information lacking in the initial application that may mitigate that, or they can apply for forgiveness if they did not have the financial ability. we do use third-party to try to track folks down. i do not know the time frame we would go before we would say we are unable to serve the letter or are not getting a response, that it would go to treasury and start accruing interest and penalties. >> thank you. i appreciate it. i have a couple questions, and then we will finish up, but thanks for your patience. with regard to mitigation, i know you believe in that strongly. but i believe -- and that is why i filed my bill, to encourage businesses and residential owners to rebuild medicaid. i feel that maybe the federal government is just encouraging folks -- and this is all we have, the authority we have --

to basically rebuild the way it was before instead of building stronger. that way the buildings and structures are more resilient. comment on that, how we can improve things with regard to mitigation. >> i found that by oftentimes put a lot of emphasis under the stafford act. there's a part that says if you have damages -- you are public or eligible nonprofit and you have damages and we give to the money to repair it, we also look at whether it makes sense to build it back better to reduce future damages. we look at things like a cost/benefit analysis that says we realize the building could go for a 110 mile per hour rout, but if you got wiped out by a hurricane and we build it back to 130 miles an hour and the

building survives next time, is that not a good investment? this is money that is tied to the actual damages. we have another part of the program called section 404, which provides an overall percentage of funds to the state afterwards for mitigation but does not necessarily have to be tied to a damaged properties, which may allow them to mitigate other threats. in particular, with some of the flooding we have seen, people are looking at how to reduce future flood loss. tell you what -- we saw a lot of areas where they have done things such as buyouts that in previous years had flooded severely that had much less impact, even though they received record floods. we have seen elevation work. it is one of those areas that is important, but the problem with these programs as they are always after a disaster. iran mitigation comes back to states that are willing to develop and implement as we did florida, building codes of

corporate with the hazards and the tremendous difference that made in halls built prior to that code and the performance of the 2004-2005 hurricanes. if we are going to spend federal tax dollars to fix something, build it back better. the reality is they got hit with a category 4 hurricane, and i said it does not make sense that we will have to take public safety buildings and build them back to the code. the fire crews are not losing the equipment and stations and are there to respond in the aftermath. we are very much supportive of continuing the practice where it makes financial sense. >> very good. exactly. it makes financial sense as well. one last question. the mall was required to develop and implement a training program

for the prevention of waste, fraud, and abuse of federal natural disaster relief assistance. comment on that. what is the status of that program? >> we have been breaking that into training. one of the areas we focus on early was through our chief procurement office, as well as looking at overall training for folks to recognize in our national process considers when people call in. there are steps we take to try to rule out bogus addresses and things like that but also things to look for that would erase suspicion. where we do find instances of fraud, we refer this for investigation, but i think what we have been trying to do is convince people we can be fast and not have the kind of abuse to the system we saw in previous disasters. that means you have to change how you look at things. you cannot build it on to the end and try to capture it. our most recent audit that we

got from outside auditors, the high being katrina, which is an ally because it was an extraordinarily large storm, but we continue to look at how we minimize the error rate without putting an undue burden on people applying for assistance, but also look at everything from our contracts, how we do our business, and we would be happy to provide you an update. we have already had requests for what these activities are and how we are doing that. >> thank you very much. that includes our hearing. i want to thank you for your testimony and for your questions. members of the subcommittee will have additional questions for you, and i am sure you will be able to respond in writing. we ask that you respond, of course. the hearing record will be held open for 10 days to without objection, the subcommittee stands adjourned. thank you very much.

[captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011]

>> coming up in about 15 minutes here on c-span, we are going to take you to the national council on u.s.-arab relations in washington to hear from the libyan ambassador to the u.s.. he will be talking about his country's next steps after the death of former leader muammar gaddafi. after -- also speaking this afternoon will be the saudi ambassador, who will speak first. all of that getting under way in about 15 minutes. until then, part of this morning's "washington journal."

host: we want to talk to you about the economy and your confidence in the economy. "wall street journal" --

again, that was the "wall street journal" writing about the economy. we will begin with a democrat in bloomington, indiana. george, what is your confidence level on the economy right now? --ler: here's the problem what we had over the last several years -- actually, for the last two decades, we had falling wages in the face of rising productivity. we are producing more and working harder and receiving less pay. what we have is a productivity wage gap. you have to prop up the economy with artificial demand, meaning either more debt or whatever propping up the economy in the area where wages should be.

if we do not have an environment where employers are competing for workers, trying to get the employer -- the employee of choice as opposed to the employee of last resort, you will not have a healthy economy. most skill level and education is not going to be a panacea because if everyone went out and got a ph.d., it would not raise median income one penny. we do not need the same amount of businesses hiring more people. we need more business start-ups so we can have businesses competing for workers. i will close on this no -- host: you know what? we will let you close on that last note. robert tweets in. we have gotten several facebook comments already this morning to you quickly, the question --

what is your confidence level in the economy? are you confident in the economy? david says, "why should i be." next call comes from texas. hello, mr. peterson. how are you? caller: i am fine. been trying to get through to you for a month. really am glad to get through. host: was mrs. peterson doing? caller: making coffee. finally getting winter here in texas. host: i was in texas, and it was hot. caller: we have 48 degrees this

morning. looking good. host: sounds like a nice day. what is the economy looking like now? what is your confidence level? caller: economy here is pretty good. they are building a lot around here. host: do you think that is? caller: i really do not know the answer to that. host: what do you think about your governor running for president? caller: that move. he has done a good job in texas. i do not want him to be president. i want him to stay right down here as governor. host: good to talk to you. we will talk to you in a month. anthony is a republican in north dakota. caller: i guess i would like to say that it seems like everything just keeps getting worse due to the fact that the

government keeps biting into the economy -- keeps butting into the economy. host: will leave it there. gene, what is your confidence level in the economy? caller: i am losing my mind. ever since then it stopped the cost of living increase for social security. i am getting ready to sign my third lease on the 15th of november. each year, it is going up. my rent is going up. everything is going up, and everybody's talking about discontinuing social security. we have already paid for two years of decrease.

nobody is saying what the benefits of not getting a cost of living increase for two years -- where is that money going? host: thanks for calling in this morning. president obama has an op-ed this morning in "the financial times."

"this requires action in several areas," the president rights.

again, this is the president writing in "the financial times" this morning in case you want to read that yourself. buffalo, new york, dean is a democrat. what is your confidence level in the economy right now?

caller: good morning. i live in a little town north of springfield, missouri, a few miles. springfield and missouri itself is doing pretty well. like it did not even bother them. they just keep growing. but before i get off, yesterday, i met representatives black from tennessee, and he was talking about when he turned 65, you have got to go on medicare. you do not. i turned 65 the fifth of this month. i got two different letters from social security asking if i did or did not want medicare, and i checked it not. i have not heard any more about it. you do not have to take it. but he said as the law, you have to take medicare. she needs to get her facts

straight. >> you have remained in the va system, correct? caller: yes, i have been in the va system since the '70s. -- since the 1970's. i am a vietnam veteran. that will keep you the host: throughout your life? caller: that is right. they have kept me alive since the mid-1970's. host: we appreciate your calling in. congratulations on turning 65. thanks for watching. caller: good morning. first of all, it takes money. consumer savings takes from the circle of flow. since people are taking their savings and putting money out there, it has increased.

the fourth quarter, usually business comes up the economy and also consumers spend on christmas goods. our whole problem is from this economy right now, the politics. once the politicians get together and start working as patriarchs for this country right here, everything will go up, but as long as they are bickering, that is what is holding the whole economy at bay right there. host: as a republican in ohio -- rick? hello? go ahead, please. caller: i do not think the economy is doing so well. i cannot find any incentive to

save. as part of why everyone is spending so much. you cannot make any interest or anything. the stock market, you do not know from day to day what it will be. that was mainly my comment. host: thanks for calling in this morning. lawmaker time in washington falls off with the house out until september 10th so that lawmakers can spend august in their districts and attend their parties political conventions. the last week in august is a constituent work week and set aside for the republican national convention. the first week in september allows for constituent work and

the democratic national convention. the democrats quickly lambasted it as inadequate. boehner says it is time to get serious. house speaker rejected a proposal bf the democratic members of the supercommittee on deficit reduction declaring $1.3 trillion in tax increasing unacceptable. the majority of the six democrats privately proposed a package that would cut the deficit by $3 trillion over 10 years including more than $1 trillion in tax increases. this is in politico. they are looking at the top 10 senate races. they say virginia is the top race followed by massachusetts, montana is number three and missouri is number four. john bruener and claire mckas kill there. -- claire mccaskill.

nevada five, hawaii is number six with former governor linda lingle the republican in that race. that is from politico. next call from gary, indiana, arthur, independent line. hi, arthur. caller: good morning. i appreciate you allowing me to take this time to express my opinion. first of all, i don't have much confidence in the economy because we don't have any leaders. look at the leaders and they don't have much confidence because they are continuing to get increases in their pay, income from other sources and stacking the deck in such a way they benefit. so when we get some leaders that will lead and you lead by example. if you feel this is going well, you cut your pay and quit

telling the people to cut theirs. tightening their belts and you are not tightening yours. host: michelle in palm desert, california, on the republican line. caller: good morning. basically in the state of california we have all sorts of programs that are putting all sorts of money to illegal immigrants, school funds and the cathy program and all sorts of other things. there is no money left for the people that were born here and raised here. i don't have any faith in our economy because as the caller before me said, we don't have any leaders or anybody in office that can actually stand up for what we need and what we want. host: thanks, michelle. a couple of tweets that have come in. freelancer tweets in g.o.p.'s deficit eight year spending spree with bush got us here. $11.5 trillion and now want to

balance debt on poor, seniors, workers. g.o.p. is the problem. another tweet from lee, how can anyone have confidence in the economy when president obama spends money like a drunken sailor. chris nbama. even after the republican brinksmanship during the debt ceiling debate, the economy grew by 2.5% last quarter. ron is a democrat. caller: hey, how are you doing this morning i believe the economy is starting to improve a little bit. we got into a big hole. if large companies and the banks messed things up. if they repeal dodd-frank and kill regulations they are going to get in that cycle and mess the economy back up. i think dodd hch frank has lots

of regulations and between that andy forcement, i think that is what wall street needs and then, you know, republicans in the congress have been doing absolutely nothing except trying to get obama out of there. anything that comes from washington or the senate is completely just dead on arrival when it reaches congress. whether it is good for the economy, bad for the economy or indifferent. it doesn't matter. all they can do is say no. at least obama is trying to do something. congress is sitting on their hands and veetoing everything that comes across their desk. host: where is chesterfield, new hampshire, and have you seen any of the republican candidates coming through? >> i have seen the republican candidates, not too terribly impressed with any of them. chesterfield is southern new hampshire on the border of new

hampshire and vermont. host: near nashua? caller: south of nashua. host: are you seeing ads on tv? caller: oh, yeah. i'm getting inundated with polling calls from the republicans and democrats. yes, it is all starting. i don't see anything changing until the election and then hopefully congress gets changed in the election and maybe we can get something done. host: one final question on the election. sorry about this. any word on the date. has a date been set for the primary? have you seen any news on that? caller: i have not. ron, thanks for calling in. we'll see you at the new hampshire primary whenever that may be. shakira in trenton, new jersey, democrat. caller: good morning. i have two reasons for having confidence in the economy. the occupy wall street movement that has caught fire across the

country. i think that if those people who are inspired by the folks who are standing up for us on the streets will go and vote democrat across the board so we can change congress and get some action finally out of congress, that will go a long way towards supporting the president's jobs program. number one. and number two, i think it is in these times, these kinds of economic times when there is a transition in the economy more people are becoming entrepreneurial and exercising their entrepreneurial interests. i went into an apple store the other day, it was the busiest store in the entire mall. people are really looking to be their own employer these days. that inspires me and gives me hope the economy will pick up. that 2.5% growth they saw in consumer spending came from the

folks at the top. those people are spending like drunken sailors. they are the ones spending like drunken sailors not the president. host: did you buy anything at the apple store? caller: no. i went to get my son's mac repaired. host: bill baity treats in, our resident statistician of our twitter followers. he is sending different stats. here he sends in gallup's tracker says 71% of the americans say the economy is getting worse with 23% say getting better. from politico, fcc chairman jewel yuss jankowski oversees an f.c.c. overall. taking on the telecom industry's 800-pound gorilla. an $8 billion subsidy program written in the dialup era. >> the journal is available on

c-span.org. we are leaving this now and going live to the national council of u.s.-arab relations. speaks first about u.s.-saudi arabian relations. then the libyan ambassador to the u.s. talking about the country's next steps after the death of muammar gadhafi. >> thank you very much. thank you very much. thank you very much. thank you very much. [speaking arabic] >> i'm truly overwhelmed, ladies and gentlemen, by your reception. i thank you for it. i have just come back from riyadh and attended the sad

occasion of the late crown prince's death. i must tell you that for me it was a special relationship that i had with him. he was my mentor. my first job was with him. throughout his career he was always an example of humility and diligence. two qualities that i hope the rest of us will learn and keep. this is also a happy occasion. the kingdom has a new crown prince. i'm sure all of you have read about him. when i was in the intelligence department i worked very closely with his royal highness and i can tell you that the right choice was made.

it was made by the bahar council, which was established five years ago by king abdula to oversee the succession in the kingdom. and in spite of all of the dire predictions of beltway experts, the council performed exceptionally well. there was unanimity in his selection when the king nominated him. there may be those of you who, despite young dukes's introduction of me still don't know who i am. and to those i would say if you read korn of the "washington post" and others, i am that

humorless, pathetic, irrelevant person. but i got the distinction of being a skilled diplomat. i have thought of preparing a speech like the one i delivered last year but really the occasion calls for something off the cuff. and something from the heart. without much thinking. and without much preparation. i agree with mr. cohen that perhaps i am humorless, but what is there to be hue morous about particularly when it comes to our part of the world where we still see long standing conflict going on, new potential for

conflict coming about and the turmoil and the troubles that several of our neighboring countries have gone through in the past year. with bloodshed and killing and civil war. not much to be humorous about. nonetheless, that does not give us the excuse not to work and not to try to overcome these challenges. as the people of libya have shown when people put their minds to the task, they can withstand all of the challenges. and suffer all of the sacrifices and in the end they achieve victory. i applaud the ambassador of libya who is here and the people

of libya. if we go from libya to syria, we see a situation where the bloodshed still continues. and in spite of the evidents whether by individual leaders like the king of saudi arabia or the arab league or the international community, nonetheless, the government of syria seems to be bent on continuing its mercyless and bloody -- merciless and bloody attack on its own people. if we go to yemen we find a similar situation, where, despite all the efforts put in time to bring peace to that country, particularly by the countries who advised a transition plan to achieve that peace, yet the bloodshed continues.

in bahrain, ladies and gentlemen, that small island went through a turmoil that it does not deserve. we all know bahrainis, shiia and sunni, jew and other religions, they are a people of peace, a people of commerce and a people of enlightenment and they don't deserve to go through the troubles that they have. and when ba rain asked for support from the e.c.c. countries in meeting the challenges of its upheavals, that support was in the form of of military units that went there not to quell the demonstrations or to arrest the demonstrators, but rather to protect the infrastructure facilities on that island.

bahrain is not a wealthy country. they don't have oil to sell. the kingdom provides them with oil. they refine in their refinery and they sell it on the market. so the refinery is an important and life-giving institution in bahrain's makeup. and the units that went from saudi arabia and the u.a.e. went there to protect the refinery, the airport, the seaport and the commercial center. none of them was involved in any quelling of rioters or demonstrators. if you take a satellite picture from top, you will see that their cantonements are precisely where where those installations are. these are very strict orders by the leaders of the e.c.c. to the

commanders of the arabia shield forces that went in bahrain. remaining in all of this turmoil, of course, not mentioning iraq and its unresolved and still work-in-progress developments with a goth that is still -- with a government that is still unrepresentative of all of the people, with clear and apparent interference from iran, with the united states coming to withdraw its forces from iraq, i have maintained and i still maintain there is a need for the united nations security council russian -- council resolution declaring

iraq's territory integrity under chapter seven. it is a world responsibility, ladies and gentlemen, to protect the territory alintegrity of iraq. it is the the united states responsibility, ladies and gentlemen, having undertaken that invasion of iraq, to push that security council resolution through and to see that the rest of the world abide by it. this will not only quell any internal centrifugal ambitions within iraqy society and -- iraqi society and challenges, but quell any outside ambitions that may develop on the territory and integrity of iraq. if we go from there to the perennial and lamentable and still open wound of palestine,

what do we see there? we see a people who are still occupied, who are still colonized, whose territory is still being stolen day by day by an occupation force that defies all of the yuned -- all of the united nations resolutions and international law and without account to anybody. when this administration and the united states made the stand on settlement in israel the result was that israel defied the united states. and not only continued to increase the settlements, but also to challenge the leadership

of the united states in trying to achieve peace between the israelis and their neighbors. have any of you seen the movie "the mouse drawer" with peter sellers portraying the characters, finally if i remember the movie correctly sees how world war ii went and the united states coming to the rescue of europe after its devastation, deciding they would have to declare war on the united states so that the united states can come and develop them. it is a humorous and funny movie and i remember when i was watching it in those days laughing because peter sellers was such a wonderful actor. and all the whole idea of

invading the united states in order for it to come back to fix things was so humorous. but is it so humorous anymore how we see israel is treating the united states? and the leadership of the united states. it is an incredible and totally fantasmaboric situation. when i was watching mr. netanyahu lecturing mr. obama in the oval office on what israel will or will not do, i was flabbergasted by the audacity of the man. is that acceptable, ladies and gentlemen? is it conceivable that this

country where -- and i brought this book with me, it is a book about the united states constitution and the declaration of independence. i will read to you a sentence penned by that most marvelous of leaders, unique in his time, and i think in all time mr. thomas jefferson. who said, we hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these rights are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

this is your legacy, ladies and gentlemen. you americans put that for the rest of us in the world not only to admire but hopefully to emulate. i can't understand why that cannot be applied to the palestinian people. how can we see the united states standing in the face of the palestinians when they want to declare their state in the most reasonable and the most legitimate and unalienable rights that they have like any other state. and the u.s. says it will veeto that.

that is unacceptable, ladies and gentlemen. you, as americans, cannot accept that. and we, as arabs, will not accept that. and this is where my contention that america's veetoing of the statehood for palestine, not only will it affect the relationship between saudi arabia and the united states, but also with the rest of the world, not just the muslim world. it is the whole global community that accepts palestine as a state and only the u.s. that objects to that. this, ladies and gentlemen, is

something that only americans can fix. but what i can say is that all of us in the arab world, and i include myself in this, truly want the americans to fix this. because of our friendship of you and because of such wonderful words that mr. jefferson left to humanity. if i were to quote other words by other leaders in america, there would be volumes and volumes of eloquence and rhetorical exuberance that we have always had high in esteem and respect.

this council is one of the instruments and one of the institutions that works to overturn what is definitely an unjust position by your country. i see faces of others who are equally committed to that principle of overturning the unjustness of your political position on palestine. i wish you success. and i tell you that as a saudi who spent perhaps his misspent youth in his country, i still expect from the united states the right thing to do. thank you very much. [applause]

thank you. thank you. thank you. thank you. thank you very much. thank you very much. >> he has to go to georgetown where he teaches and he will be teaching a course filled with the information and insights and revelations we have been privileged to receive here because he shared them with us. thank you. >> thank you.

>> this is the national council on u.s.-arab relations in

washington. they just heard from the former saudi ambassador to the u.s.. next they will hear from the libyan ambassador who will talk about the country's next steps following the death of muammar gadhafi. he will get underway in just a little bit. coming up tonight on c-span2, joe biden will be the keynote speaker at the democratic party convention in orlando that gets under way at 7:30 eastern, speaking down in florida will be the democratic national committee chair and florida representative debbie wasserman schultz and the u.s. senator bill nelson speaking tonight, again at 7:30 eastern.>> up nexl

on u.s.-arab relations will hear from the libyan ambassador to the united states. the associated press reports obama will meet on monday at the white house with former prime minister tony blair. the white house did not announce the purpose of the meeting, but the stalled middle east peace process is the likely reason.

former prime minister blair is the mideast envoy. again, tony blair meeting with president obama monday at the white house on the domestic side. -- at the white house. on the domestic side, obama did not have the parents, but the white house issued two more executive actions, and both of them intended to boost businesses. the president is directing government agencies to shorten the time it takes for federal research to turn into commercial products. the president also ordering that a centrallized online site be created within 90 days for companies to find information on federal services.

[captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> let me offer you five minutes now to turn off your cell phones, blackberries. thank you. [unintelligible]

we're live on the national council of u.s.-arab relations in washington. next, we will hear from the libyan ambassador to united states, ali aujali. european leaders have reached an agreement to deal with the europe -- with the greek that

issue and the other euro zone countries that are having financial difficulty. david cameron answered questions in question time this week. we will show that you sunday at 9:00 eastern and pacific here on c-span. we are also effort thing to bring you a speech by the greek prime minister on his country's financial system ration and the euro zone rescue. you will see that schedule over the weekend. the irish have elected a new president, it appears. the associated press reports michael higgins is headed for victory in ireland's presidential election as they pick a left-wing idealist to be the new face of a debt-struck nation.

>> we thank you for your willingness to stay with us here through a dynamic scheduling. . we are to recover that and we hope you can remain with that throughout this friday afternoon, may extend longer than we thought. that said, the next event on the

schedule is one you certainly would not want to mess. harriet fulbright, the widow of senator j. william fulbright, and i never failed to meet a fulbright scholar dropped my travels and the world is a better place for that program, but mrs. fulbright was introduced earlier. we know she is in her own right every bit as much of the force for international understanding and indeed the peaceful resolution of disputes as was her wonderful husband before her. i will not go into the details of her biography because it has been presented, but once again the national council is graced the had harriet fulbright on our stage. thank you. [applause] >> thank you.

i am here standing here to actually introduce ambassador ali aujali, who is a first-rate diplomat, and we're very happy to have him with us. born and raised in libya, he started his career in 1968 in london and went on to malaysia, argentina, and brazil. he has also held a variety of positions in his country's ministry of foreign affairs, and then on september 9, 2011, he presented his credentials to president barack obama and we are happy that in here. he is the first ambassador to the u.s. from taking free libya. he practices his profession according to one of senator fulbright's more famous

statements. the making of peace is a continuing process that must go on from day to day, from year to year, so long as our civilization shell last. our participation in this project and process is not just the signing of a charter with a big red seal. it is a daily task, participating in all the details and decisions which, together, constitute a live the new and growing policy. it is therefore my great pleasure and honor to present uconn ambassador -- to present you ambassador ali aujali. [unintelligible]

>> first of all, let me say thank you very much for this invitation. thank you for the american policy makers councils for organizing this every year. it is a very important -- and washington, d.c., and i am very happy to be here for the second time to give some remarks. three years ago exactly this month, 2008, i came here and i made very few remarks. that day when i came here, i was expecting a very important news from tripoli concerning the settlements of local -- then the outstanding issue with libby and the united states,

which took more than the case, it was settled that day when it came to this council. thank you very much. the second thing goes to i want to give my condolences to the saudi government for the death of the crown prince. i want to thank first of all the united states for what you did for the libyan people when they asked for help against this brutal regime, which took place after the libyans' assembly raise their voice ask one simple question -- what happened to our beloved to hatband -- who had been detained in 1996? and they only came to know about them in 2008. gaddafi -- the libyan people

were desperate, and they asked for help. i was here in the united states, in washington, d.c., interviewed by wolf blitzer, and he asked me what do you want to tell the president. told the president the libyan people need your help. libyan people are being killed by their own ruler, who rolls them for the last 42 years. without the lead of the united states, libyan people are going to suffer, and maybe it will be a massacre. and if no international action would be taken, then i am sure that the world will regret it. we have the experience of srebrenica, and we are grateful

to the united states, a grateful to the people, the media, grateful to the congress became to support us, even voices telling the people here and there that libya is not an interest of the united states. but the matter of interest is human beings. libyan people are facing this brutal regime and have no way of defending themselves. i read it -- really happy on the behalf of libyan people to thank you, president, very much. i want to thank nato, who also came to help the libyan people. united nations, also. the arab league, qatar, united arab emirates, each, jordan, all these countries came forward to help the libyan people.

when the revolution started in libya on the 15th or 16th of february, i was asking my son, what is going on? and i made a call to the important people to find out why gaddafi killing the people just forceable demonstrations put and then all i got from that time, only young people on drugs, and that is a very easy issue to handle. when i heard, i said, there is no meaning for killing anybody. then my family, the libyan community, we had been discussing what is going on in libya.

there is only one choice in front of me, only one position i have to make, and that decision is not difficult, because what i have seen in my eyes, what we have been watching on the tv, it is unbelievable. i want to thank the libyan community for the role -- their role, the libyans and that, my staff, my family. i am grateful to them. nobody in libya, and i think in the world, and the intelligence agencies, they expect that the libyan people raise one day against this regime, because the main purpose, the main issues,

the main interest of this regime, how to keep that power in the hands of gaddafi. i have been working for libya for 42 years. i was appointed during -- before the coup de tock. we had been trying for all these years, if we can make some changes, we cannot leave the country in the hands of gaddafi and his family to do what they want. there are many decent and honorable people and libya. they felt a long time ago that what was going on in libya was completely wrong, wrong direction. with all the wealth they have, they should enjoy their lives. they are desperate. they have no loyalty to their own country.

but february 17, the changes. for the first time in 42 years, that we are proud of our country, the proud of our people. the libyans chanting on the 23rd of this month, when they embraced a free of libya, that you are free libyans. the libyans are free after this revolution. you do not know how much we suffered as a diplomat, to keep our principles and to keep our dignity and to work to make some kind of understanding between the united states and libya. i always believed that maybe when gaddafi felt comfortable with the united states, maybe he will turn to his people, look at them, realize need attention, they need education, and two

messages from the victory happening in libya. message to the dictatorships all over the world. did not ever others an estimate your people. -- did not ever underestimate your people. this is a great lesson. a message to the leader also, they have to -- to give democracy to the people, to choose their representative. without this, i think the arab world is under stress from their own governments, they are rising now, and there's no more chance for compromise. when the libyans raised against this regime, i spoke with mr.

jibril, and i asked him for one thing. my advice to you is one thing. no compromise. no discussions with gaddafi or his government. we have one estimate, one hope, one dream, that libby is free from gaddafi. -- that libya is free from gaddafi. the libyans find themselves, in different society, facing a brutal regime, and they find themselves, they need the leadership, and the organized themselves in the national transitional council. people know each other, but they

never worked together in such a situation, from a peaceful administration to become a real -- these young people who have been fighting, unbelievable, i believe because of the accumulation of frustration, unemployment, and hatred of this regime. for eight months, the libyan people, they made their dreams come true. but we must realize there are so many challenges in front of us, but at the same time, i have two things. one is libya is able to be reunited for eight months to fight against this regime, who has been killing, using mass

grave, and i have a great hope in this people to continue the tree of the libyans for free democratic elected government. the second thing, the international community who came to help the libyans, desperate libyan, we not only need their support and their help during the war, but we need the help and support during the peace. libyans need better education. they need training. they need security, and they need civilization. this is very important issues. the national security council and the commission yesterday of nato. i was not very happy, myself, if

you ask me. i thought maybe they would extend it to the end of the year, until we managed to control every thing in our country, but the forming of another option, which is led by qatar and united states and other countries, this has made me feel more comfortable. there is no resistance now in libya. gaddafi is dead and finished. there may be some folks here and there. we have 8,000 miles of borders with african countries. many others came to our borders to kill our people. the challenges also we have, we have to remove the arms from the street. libyan arms are carrying arms in their hands, it now

unfortunately, there are arms everywhere. we need help. we need help for this kind of weapons which libyans will be able to collect, like missiles. we need to secure our borders. libya has no army, no police come to accept security brigades formed under gaddafi's leadership. they vowed not to protect their country, but to protect the regime, the family. we need help from the international community. we need to decide among our cells -- ourselves that there are so many wounds, so many hearts, silly suffering -- so many hurts, so many suffering,

but what happened in the last eight months is equal to the last 42 years of suffering. we have to care for how we are going to absorber, how we are going to get the libyans together to unite. it is not impossible. i am sure the libyans will carry the guns to fight gaddafi, they will be able to carry in their hearts the civilization for the people. we need conciliation among ourselves. libyans carry all sorts of -- islamists -- what is going to help with libyans? what about their agenda pulled from the beginning, gaddafi was using al qaeda.

who brought them to libya? he was responsible for that. the one who has been claiming as a member of al qaeda, they can back and they are living their normal life. when they see the libyans, their families, their houses being raided and being killed and taken by the regime who was using only the lives and munitions to kill their own people, and you cannot blame them. there is no worry about libya to unite. there's no worry that one group would take over. all libyans bear a very high price. for one thing, they want to achieve democracy, i have to thank god that i am still alive to see this regime was ousted by the libyan people.

they are also talking about sharia law. mr. jalil mentioned on 23 october, did not worry, this is the excite of the celebration -- the excitement of the celebration. he was the minister of justice. we have to let our counsel, and the council is the only legislation that will be involved in the law, according to the interests of the people. then i want the international community and libya to take it easy with the libyans. libyans are not aggressive. they're conservative, this is true.

they are dreaming to have a normal relations with the world. we want normal relations. 50 years ago, the audience used to travel to europe without visas. time, thisgaddafi's is a nightmare. we want to have a normal relations. we want libya to be an active member in the international community help security, how countries who are suffering also under dictatorship regimes. our responsibility is completely different from what happened under gaddafi. what we expect from the united states? we expect of course that to build a congress, as did not exist for the last 75 years. i came to this country in 2004,

trying to help as much as i can to normalize the relations for the same reason i mentioned just a few minutes ago. but my job has never been difficult. this relationship has never been tabled. any statement, anything having to do with gaddafi and he is not happy with it, that means we go to the first request. i hope this period of no confidence is over. we want the participation of the united states in the reconstruction of our country. we want the american think tanks and democratic institutions to help us create the atmosphere of how the libyans can practice their rights to vote for governments. i must mention here that i am really great occurred -- grateful to secretary clinton

who has been to libya a few days ago, and now there is a deal, unded he first libyan wonde arrive in boston for treatment in united states hospitals. the weapons industry, the security of the country, and because the security of libya is very important, we have tunisia on the east and in the west we have -- we have tunisian on the west and we have egypt on the east, and we have to work together. the illegal immigrants -- gaddafi used to use them as weapons and blackmailing other countries for the last