overwhelming support from republicans and democrats. that's the kind of stuff people are dying to see in washington, and it worked; the president supports it. for a while, it seemed -- or 24 hours there -- it seemed like house leaders in the republican party supported it, until i guess they were told not to by a subfaction or some representation, some sizeable group within the house republican conference. but that's not -- they're not speaking for the overwhelming majority of the american people, republicans in the country, for -- certainly for their colleagues in the senate, all of whom want them to pass this bipartisan, sensible compromise to ensure that americans don't have their taxes go up, and then as everybody has agreed on, to then refocus our efforts on getting a full-year extension. >> (inaudible.) >> that's the way out there. there is a bill -- there is a

bipartisan compromise available. the negotiation has happened he sat down with senator mcconnell and senator reid and urged that process to begin. they worked hard on a yearong. when they felt like they couldn't do it by the end of the year they recommended this two-year -- two-month compromise. republicans and democrats overwhelmingly agreed. they should take it up and pass it. laura. >> two questions. one is, can you tell us how long the conversation lasted with the speaker? about 10 minutes. i don't have an exact time for you, but it seemed like about 10 minutes. >> and so obviously more was said than what you said in the readout if it was 10 minutes long. >> i'm not going to give you a transcript if that's what you mean. but, look, the president -- >> unless they just both repeated themselves over and over.

(laughter.) >> the preside was very clear in stating what i told you he said. i don't think he could be any clearer. >> i guess what i'm trying to figure out is both sides have now put out readouts where they say that their principals essentially reiterated their public positions. my question is whether in this conversation there was any hope for advancing this beyond the publicly stated position of each side. >> again, i've given you the readout. there aren't -- it is an absolutely fair representation of what the president said, and i leave it to the speaker to charterize what he said. but what i described to you is exactly what the president said. it is exactly his position. it is his public position and it is his private position the house should take up the senate compromise. >> you've talked a lot about how everyone is committed to a year-long deal and we'llet that done, but we just need to pass this crisis moment.

what makes you think that it's going to be so easy to get a year-long deal, given that, with all due respect, the parties have failed to do so until now? >> well, look, senators reid and mccoell made progress; that process needs to continue. the ways -- there are ways to do this that are not difficult. they represent choices, but there are ways to pay for ts that the president can accept, democrats can acce, and we see no rson why republicans wouldn't accept. the issues that they put forward in their -- whatever that thing is that they voted on yesterday so that they could avoid actually voting on the bill, were filled with tngs that had nothing to do with the payroll tax cut. nothing at all. >> right, but what makes you think that you're going to be

able to get past all those things that have nothing to do with the payroll tax when you start negotiating in january? >> well, again, i think that the voices of the people from west virginia, texas, connecticut and everywhere else are going to be heard. but let's be clear: great progress was made in the senate. there are ways to do this for a year that everybody, we believe, can agree on -- certainly, at least, the president, senate republicans and senate democrats, as well as house democrats. i mean, there's one -- speaking of isolation -- i mean, there's one isolated group here that doesn't want to join the

overwhelming majority of democrats and republicans who support doing one thing on behalf of the american people. increasingly, i think that isolation is becoming clear. and i expect that house republicans will be hearing from their constituents and maybe fromther folks whose opinion they respect, and maybe thatill have an effect. the politics of this are really so far less important than the substance here, because as i think jessica pointed out early on in the briefing, there is an absolute economic impact of failing to act here. there's a macroeconomic impact, a reduction of economic growth by up to 0.5 percent. that would have a direct effect on employment. there would be a terrible and direct effect on those who would no longer receive unemployment insurance as they're trying to meet their house payments and pay their bills while they're looking for a job. and all of that -- the withdrawal of all of those resources from the economy would be negative, and the effect on individuals of losing $40 in their paycheck, every paycheck, is real and harmful. at this time where we're still in a fragile stage of our

economic recovery where things are getting better but are far from good enough, the last thing congress should do is, in an act of total disregard for a bipartisan consensus, total disregard for the effect it would have on 160 million people, refuse to vote on this compromise. yes, sir. >> thanks, jay. >> sorry, john, it took me so long. >> no, that's all right. it seems that the payroll tax cut is going to expire whether it's 10 days from now or two months or a year from now. and you just spoke about the impact that it would have if it's not extended on middle- class families -- 160 million taxpayers out there. has the president or his economic team given any thought to making this payroll tax cut permanent? >> no.

>> why not? >> because it was specifically -- it was specifically designed to -- a year ago, working with republican leaders, designed to give the economy at that moment the boost that it needed a, again, notwithstanding those o choose to ignore basic economic facts and call themselves economists nevertheless, it has had a very positive impact this year on the economy, both on growth and job creation, and would continue to have that. now, at some point, you hope that the recovery is at a stage where we would no longer need that added help. that's why it is a one-year measure. again, the debt ceiling -- the willingness to go through a debt ceiling showdown every three or six months i think makes clear that their concern about -- the stated concern about uncertainty is suspicious to say the least. republicansalso -- overwhelmingly supported the

temporary bush tax cuts, right? so this is a real-world impact. this is not an esoteric exercise. it's not a political exercise. it's a bill that would either provide americans with an extra $40 per paycheck or take it away. and americans who live paycheck to paycheck and americans who are doing a little bit better th that and saving a little bit will have to change their budgeting next year if the house walks away from this bipartisan compromise that 80 percent of senate republicans support butor some reason the house republican leaders don't. >> so the president and the administration believes, then, that a year from now those taxpayers that you referenced will be able to handle that $40 hit in their paychecks?

>> well, the are a lot of things that -- there's a lot of water to pass under the bridge economically between now and a year from now. there are a lot of -- as you know, reporting as you do on these issues -- a lot of other things that will have to be decided next year economically that will have potentially an effect on tax rates and a number of issues economically. we would also certainly hope that the -- i'm not here making any kind of economic prediction about growth or anything except to say that we need to take the measures we can take to help the recovery along, to give it the kind of momentum that will lead to the kind of economic growth that will bring down the unemployment rate and put people back to work and eventually get us to a point where, yes, we would not need that kind of measure that we need now and that americans need now. alright. >> the president's shopping trip real quk? he's got bo, he's buying dog stuff, he's getting pizza and stuff. so what's the symbolism, what's the --

>> i'm personally looking forward to a little of that pizza, having not had lunch. >> what symbolism, if any, should we read into it? is the message that the dog is the president's best friend because it's washington this time of year? is the message that everyone should gout and spend -- is the message that everyone should go out and spend money before christmas? is the message that -- is there no message and this is just e first time he's had a chance to go shopping? or is the message that he can't get anything done until congress acts, so he mights well go shopping? >> he did buy a game that cost about $40. >> it's multiple choice. >> hashtag 4-- >> i wouldn't vote for- >> and an expensive chew toy. >> yes, i think scott did my work for me there. so -- no, the -- i would refer you to the pool report. i was here as this otr, as we call them, was happening. the president is obviously very busy here. shortly before making that excursion he was on the phone with senator reid and speaker boehner.

and sometimes it's nice to get out of the house. thanks very much. thanks very much. >> presidential candidate, newt gingrich, makes a campaign appearance in new -- in new hampshire. after that, the national lighting of the menorah. after that, the future of news

media. >> with the iowa caucuses and new hampshire primary next month, the contenders look back at 14 men who ran for president, but lost. thursday, eugene debs. friday, charles evans hughes, chief justice of the united states. on saturday, three-time governor of new york, house met followed by wendell willkie. the contenders, every night at 10:00 eastern on c-span. have you tried the free c-span radio application? >> the c-span application is digitally appealing. the audio quality is clear. insanely great deal considering it is free. awesome application. it took 10 seconds to learn how to use it. quite get streaming audio of c- span radio as well as all three television networks, including

live coverage of congress. you can listen to our interview programs including "q&a", the communicators, and afterwards. c-span, available where you are. find out more at c- span.org/radioapp. >> presidential candidate, newt gingrich, held this press conference. he spoke about rival candidate, mitt romney's, attack ads. this is about 15 minutes. al captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> the national right to work

committee said cuba had measures bottled up in committee. how can he be an ally on that agenda? >> at a state level, i was strongly in favor of it. >> what about the federal level? >> i am prepared to campaign on spending as an automatic federal requirement while and states decide if they want it to remain compulsory. >> as speaker of the house, you're up to represent your entire congress. i did. we wanted to maintain a majority, which no republican had done since 1928. we avoided issues that would put nancy pelosi back in charge. having a house in which nancy pelosi is not in charge is a good thing. >> you talked a lot about electability.

in terms of going up against obama, you talk about your great strength. >> the primary reason that we have outperformed over what the establishment expected. he communicates on a level the people decided they want to commit to. the campaign i would run would be a much more aggressive campaign. drawing a very sharp distinctions and allowing people to decide which future do you want. that is the big difference. take the difference in tax policy. i am prepared to campaign on creating jobs my number one commitment. i want a tax policy with zero capital gains tax. governor romney proposes a capital gains tax cut that is lower than obama's.

the said basically he wanted to take the whole shoot off the table. -- the issue of the table. i do not want to take the issue off the table. if you want food stamps and 9% unemployment, you have a candidate -- barack obama. if you want to focus on wealth creation, jobs, and a bigger paycheck -- you have a candidate -- newt gingrich. we will run a campaign dramatically more dynamic about reaching out to people in making arguments. i have reached out to latinos. i have reached the it -- out to asian americans. i would welcome the naacp inviting me to their convention. i would love to argue about paychecks and food stamps. i have a different style and different approach. >> governor romney's healthcare in 2006 provides for taxpayer funding of abortion.

would either of those provisions be a deal breaker for you on any kind of health care bill on the federal level? >> i did not know the second thing. planned parenthood by statute -- a statute he signed it? >> [unintelligible] >> we have to check this. that is strange. my position is very straightforward. i have always voted for the amendments that blocked federal funding for abortion. i have said that the number two executive order i will sign of the very first day is to reinstate regin's, mexico city policy which block funding for abortion overseas. i would vote to the fund planned

parenthood and but the money in adoption services. i regard planned parenthood and the leading abortion provider in america and do not think it should get any federal funding. >> how do you think you have been attacked on -- affected by the attacks so far? when do you have to fight fire with fire? you are now going down the other end up like so many of the other candidates. quite the last of three national surveys see me over romney. there is a va survey showing me beating him. there is a survey that shows ron paul in first place, me in second place, and mitt romney third in iowa. you cannot have $7 million in funds from at you and not have some impact. i total debt -- totally expect

in iowa will have to fight our way back. the last few days in iowa have been positive. we did six-seven events yesterday. a very large crowds. i emphasize several things. one, i will remain positive. we will talk about what i want to do and my principles. we'll talk about how to solve the country's problems. i have one opponent -- barack obama. number two, i think some of the advertising is shameless -- shamelessly dishonest. a four-pinocchio add mes there is virtually nothing accurate in the ipad. -- in the ad. i called on governor romney to disarm. let's be clear -- his superpower pac has $1 million set up

to buy advertising in iowa. i challenge governor romney to stand up and run positive ads. if he was to drown me in positive ads, i do not care. oh gosh, i do not have any influence over my former staff or might millionaire friends. the big checks -- it is just not honest. how do you say you can lead america if you cannot be candid with the american people these are his ads. they are dishonest. the only person they are helping is barack obama. >> just so i am clear -- do you support house republicans sticking with the one-year plan even if it means it expires and

there will be a tax cut. >> why would you not say why is the president and the senate allowing this to expire? everybody buys the liberal line. the president johnson up and says this is a crisis. why is it a crisis? it is a republican crisis. the only reason i am running for president is to tell the truth to the american people. this is a barack obama, harry reid deliberately deceptive practice purely for political gain. it is artless to see us turned into a third world -- third world country. what is such a big deal about the senate coming back to washington to do its job? if i were john boehner, i would be firm in saying let's pass a one-year extension. where is the president? where is the senate?

why is it their fault? i think this idea that it is always the house republicans at fault is fundamentally flawed. >> this morning, mitt romney said the-calf ads are something you should be able to stand. can you have a the heat in the kitchen during a general election with obama? >> he is kidding, of course. look, i will tell you what -- if he wants to test the heat, i will meet him anywhere in iowa next week, one on one, no moderator, just a timekeeper. if he wants to retire out the kitchen, he can bring his past -- he can defend them. we will bring the washington post justification that his ads

are full of lies. i am happy. i will go into the kitchen. when governor romney like to play in the kitchen? i do not think so. he was to hide over here and pretend it is not his fault that he is letting the people of ottawa with falsehoods. it is his money and his responsibility. i can take the heat pretty well. 121,000 ads run against me in 1996. i went through two government shutdowns. i stuck to my word. i opposed tax increases in 1982 and 1980. i would be just fine with the heat from barack obama because, frankly, it will be a fair exchange. >> you were not sure if you were any stronger -- >> market the mess iraq is rapidly degenerating and joked -- degenerating into.

i am not sure we understand how long it is going to take. i think it is a much harder process -- i am very worried about iraq. the president may be about to arrest the vice-president. this is the kind of stuff that can spiraled downward very rapidly into a totally unstable country. the original campaign against saddam hussein was absolutely in my judgment the right campaign. it took 23 days. in december 2003, i was on "meet the press." i said at the time we had gone off a cliff. he was not there just to change -- replace saddam, he was there to change iraq. i said moving very fast, take

out saddam, and hire the iraqi regular army, and get out of the city because we do not have the capacity to govern a country like iraq. we just caught thousands of lives without being able to fundamentally change the country. >> [unintelligible] >> i do not make anybody gets pure unvarnished and vote. i agree with madison in federalist no. 10. i like to make sure i get a wide range of advice from a wide range of people. i rely on each of them to show me what the others are saying wrong. that gives you a much better view of the world. merry christmas, folks. >> thank you. >> thank you. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011]

thank you very much. i hope you got my note. >> will you be on the ballot in virginia? >> 10,000 last night and about 12,000 or 13,000 this morning. we have a rally last night were people are bringing more petitions. we have one more event in richmond tomorrow morning. sometime in the action, i will personally deliver them. it shows you that a guy who runs for six year and has millions of dollars has a different operational style than a guy who rouses thousands of people. in ohio, it was reported that we're doing just fine. the only reason we did not do missouri is not because it did not know about it.

missouri is not done by caucus now. we will be on the ballot in virginia. >> given your comments about massachusetts, what is your opinion of massachusetts. >> i love massachusetts. it is the center of american liberty. it is the city upon a hill that begins in massachusetts. i like visiting boston. it is a terrific city. >> what about living there? >> i have visited harvard and spoken at the kennedy school. >> you will be fighting back in new hampshire? >> they will not come at

>> hear what the candidates are saying at the newly designed c- span website for campaign 2012. >> 72 entitlement programs in washington, d.c. the vast majority, as far as the money is concerned, are operated by the state government. why? because they are state functions. somehow the federal government's stake -- things they have a role to play. >> there is no doubt that it is time to treat everyone the same. whatever it may be. the federal government does not need to be in the business of

picking winners and losers in the energy industry. >> the new what the term commander in chief actually met. an explainer in chief. a complaint -- a complainer -- campaigner in chief. >> all at c- span.org/campaign2012. >> tomorrow on washington journal, a look at the keystone pipeline which matt cook. the executive director of americans united for separation of church and state, barry lynn. robert kaplan on wall street's relationship with washington. that is live tomorrow on c-span. "this holiday weekend, three days of booktv. on afterwards, a moscow

correspondent of a failed coup that led to mikhail gorbachev's resignation brigid charles mann revisit the americas at the year after christopher columbus's arrival. edwin morris on colonel theodore roosevelt sunday at 8:00 p.m. the best sellers of 2011 monday at 7:00 a.m. tom brokaw monday at 8:00 eastern. the fall schedule is online at booktv.org. >> to celebrate the first night of hanukkah yesterday, the national norm was lit. it included remarks from the white house budget director. this is just under one hour.

>> i want to welcome you all here to washington, d.c. on the front rows of the white house. we appreciate the lighting of the national product a menorah. i am the executive vice president of this evening's event and of the national menorah itself. we would like to introduce some special guests this evening. first among them, the united states marine band, the president, led by the major. we are delighted to have with this three of the world's most for most cancers. -- cantors. he has served as our musical director for nearly 20 years now. a new rising star on the jewish music scene. they will welcome us with a

song of peace. are we ready? we welcome the united states marine band, the president on. [applause] ♪

♪

♪ [applause] >> thank you very much. the president's ellen and the three cantors. we heard them in rehearsal today. they were fantastic. let's give them a round of applause. why are we here? what are we celebrating? what was that? what are we celebrating? tell us really loudly what we are celebrating.

>> [shouting "chanukah"] for us to have so many children here in knowing what they're celebrating on the lawn of the ellipse, this is one nation under god individual, nations that we should be considering ourselves fortunate. let's hear it for the united states of america. it was not too long ago that the menorah had to be lit in secret. if you were to be out celebrating the festival, you'd

be imprisoned or worse. today we are able to come here and full sight of the public. we can come celebrate our date. what is it? many years ago, their lead to a people under hellenic influence. they wanted to destroy the faith of the jewish people. they wanted to be sure there's not anything in the lives. use it however you want. they went and defied the temple. a small army defeated this great army. they went back to the temple. they were looking for oil so

they could rekindle the menorah. they cannot find any oil that was still here. they found one little vessel. they use of that vessel. they were at the menorah. even though it should have taken them a week to get more oil, it burned for eight. what is the story? even today we market the victory of life over darkness. justice over serenade. -- justice over tyranny. decency over all people. it is that even matter if we are jewish. we have a message for you. we are here and delighted to have this opportunity to

celebrate this great transition in such a prominent fashion. i would like to recognize some officials of the administration who are here with us. we will be having a special guest who is presently on his way from the west wing. he is the highest ranking official of the jewish faith in this administration. the director of the office of management and budget. he will be arriving in a few moments. i would also like to note the presence of a good friend and the chairman of the federal communications division who is with us. hanukkah is all about communicating a message. we're glad you're here. [applause] maybe we will have a word with the director.

the liaison at the white house to the jewish community is here with us this evening. we want to welcome you. we want to welcome daniel who was the jewish liaison and assistant to the vice president. [applause] i also would like to note the presence of one who lit the menorah during a previous administration under the secretary of defense. [applause] as well as the former director of health and human services. we have a few special people --

special hanukkah songs this morning that they have prepared for us. we are going to ask for them to return to the podium. do you might be able to join in the first song. feel free to participate. president's own united states marine band. the director has just arrived. i would like to give them a warm welcome. [applause] you were just saying that while we were up lighting the menorah, he should remind me to have a word with the about some hanukkah guilt. [laughter] i will make sure he understands it later. join in the medley if you can. the united states marine band.

♪

♪

♪ [applause] >> now before we start our next song, we have someone everybody is waiting to hear from. he want to know that he is welcome. if you say his name we might get his attention. 1, 2, 3. starts with a "d" the next letter is an "r."

his hearing must be hard. i don't see him coming out. i think he wants us to say it louder. 1, 2, 3. he's getting the message. i think he wants to hear a say happy hanukkah. here he comes. ♪ ♪ drill dreidel a drill, i made it out of clay. dreidel, dreidel ♪

♪ ♪ ♪

♪

♪

[applause] >> thank you. what the president told me we will have them back for the t hree blessings. we would like to call to the podium one very special individual.

this little individual, a young individual, flew in across the country to share a few words with us. we sponsor the national menorah essay contest in memory of a rabbi who used to work what us on programs such as this. children express their thoughts about monica. thousands of children have expressed themselves about what hanukkah means to them. one of our winners is a fifth grader at the hebrew academy in san diego and is here at his parents to read his winning entry. are you nervous?

>> what hanukkah means to me. it is the right to be free. from the battle of light versus dark to light to oil with only a spark. he is a master to all including me. umass had joined in your heart. one day you shall never part. if you feel like you are drifting away, throw a shell and pray. that is what's hanukkah means to me, the right to be free. [applause]

>> he will be receiving a little gift certificate so he can buy and sell some judaica study materials. mazel tov. your parents are very proud. the menorah behind me was first led in 1979. jimmy carter personally attended the lighting ceremony. two years later, it was called the national menorah by president reagan. one individual who is very

instrumental was ambassador stewart's eisenhower who served as the domestic policy adviser to the president and insured that permission was granted to place the menorah at in space. he did that in the partnership with the rabbi of our national director, my father who spearheaded the effort of a public menorah lighting. starting in 1974 in philadelphia. in front of the liberty bell. and then with the large menorah and independent ball. followed by this. i am proud to say that my 4000

colleagues in 40 states are sponsoring 13,000 celebrations of hanukkah for the public all over the globe. it all started with a menorah about this high. now the message those much only in to synagogues and community centers, not only at the jewish schools, but we celebrated in the pentagon and the capital. it has been celebrated in very remote army bases. i would like to take a moment

for us to celebrate its in show our respect to those men and women of the united states armed forces not only who are playing the music here this evening but to have stayed ties you want to welcome all those who have returned. we want to pray for the safety and well-being of all those sorts still deploy it. a like to hear the loudest round of applause for the men and women of our armed services. [applause] it is through the sacrifices that they and their families make that we are able to celebrate our freedom here this evening. i would like to call upon the second winner in essay contest

to actually hails from philadelphia were this began. we are very excited about what she has to say. >> what hanukkah means to me. >> wait for the plane. >> when something in your life goes wrong, how do you feel about it? some people feel frightened been discouraged as if their life is ruined and will stay that way. the hanukkah dreidel teachers as otherwise. on the first side is a hebrew

letter. if they land on that letter, they win the whole pile of coins. if one land on the other, he or she does not get any of the coins. if you land on the letter hay, [inaudible] -- you win half the pile. the dreidel game represents the ups and downs of our lives. some days every day goes just had you want it. other days are when things are going fairly well and we are getting half a pile. then we have days when things are not going our way. we might even be losing our coins. what we must remember is that it keeps spinning.

of the other side of the shin is always a gimble. a great miracle happened there. this refers to the miracle of hanukkah, the battle of the greek empire seemed impossible to win. they did not give up. they thought about the other side. they cleared a path for god. this shows us that wherever we are in life, merkel happen every day around does. there is one other idea. if you add up the numerical value of the four letters coming you get 358. the value of the messiah also = 358.

-- also equals 358. it will teach us how to see this divine providence in everyone's life with the shin will be turned into a gimble. the dreidel is not a toy, it is a way of looking at life. [laughter] [applause] [laughter] -- [applause] >> rennae -- her name means "speak" in hebrew. is this a wonderful speaker or not? [applause] she will also be receiving the same gifts from us for her essay. i am sure her parents are proud. i can see how proud they are.

our next speaker is a very special individual not only to me because he is my father, but to this project because he conceived of the idea. he also established the organization which sponsors this event. he is the chairman of the executive committee of the umbrella organization of the world wide lubavitch movement. >> all of you have gathered here to celebrate this great

moments. the idea is conceived by rabbi. he raised us. many ideas have been introduced

and developed. rabbi shemtov has mentioned the backgrounds of hanukkah. as much as the world changes, it stays in one place. the first time we put out the first menorah in the park, the then president of the united states, president carter, was closed inside when hundred days due to the hostages in iraq situation which he saw as a dark moment. here was his chance to express himself to break this darkness by participating in a celebration of life. we help a full celebration will

come in our time so we do not have this. we're continuing the bright life of redemption. i would like to call attention. i have in mind thousands of colleagues such as myself who have gone into the mission. when we buy the first candle tonight, the first candle was not a miracle. it was there. it was found. to the merkel was that this -- be miracle was this oil that was found was enough to last one night and turned into a medium to provide light for a full seven days, at the time in which they had the opportunity

to prepare new oil. the message entrusted that. the first candle contains a power and a quality that was supposed to last for eight days. this was discovered. the message is that each of us has the enormous potential of bringing light into the world. you do not dismiss darkness with a broom. you light with a candle. that is the way you deal with darkness.

the world has a ruler. that is all of us here. we are in the position of bringing the message to the rest of the world. it'll take advantage of that. the challenge of this was met by delight and they're all of us here. we are carrying the irresponsibility of taking sparks that are ignited and caring in all around you. >> thank you very much. i would like to introduce our necks speaker.

i will be brief in introducing him. he is in a hurry to meet his boss. with everyone who compromise that, ladies and gentlemen, may i introduce to you one of the humblest great public servants in administration and in the united states. he has done a great deal for our country and a great deal of pride for the jewish people here and around the world. please put your hands together

and welcome the director of management and budget at the white house, the honorable jacob j. lew. >> is a pleasure to be with you here again. it is a nicer to be here when it is not cold and windy. it is amazing we're here the men or after what the weather last year. they have been great leaders in this community and their friends of mine. they have done so much to build this community. i want to think the president's director of jewish outreach for all he is doing. hanukkah is a special day for all of us. we remember that merkel happen.

merkel happen only when people put their minds to it -- miracles happen. miracles happen only when people put their mind to it. it is a partnership that we have to do our part for miracles do happen. so many have come to where we are because our parents or great grandparents came to this country and started a life where they had no previous life before. we celebrate our freedom. we live with the opportunity for our generation to come after us. today it is moving. the president went out and

greeted the returning colors. it is a day when we welcome back the people who are represented to fight for our freedom. we're thankful to them every day. one of the things about hanukkah that is so moving is that it is the holiday of light. when it is getting dark and we see it, we light the light and it gives us reason to remember the great things that can happen. all of us are thinking about what we can do to make our country and our community a better place. if we do our part, the mayor calls will happen to us. happy hanukkah. >> thank you very much. now we proceed with the lighting of the menorah. i asked everyone to please remain in places after the lighting of a menorah. please remain in in places after the lighting of the menorah. thank you. ♪

♪ ♪ ♪

♪ [applause] >> thank you very much. just before we conclude, a nice round of applause would not hurt. now just before we conclude our program, there are some people we would like to thank. first, we would like to thank the almighty god for this weather. and for protecting the united states and allowing us to live religious freedom. as we celebrate hanukkah, we remember alan gross who is still an american jew we hope to see the light of hanukkah. i would like to think some of

those who have honored to this event to make it possible. we want to thank our national chairman. we would like to hold the applause until we are done. we would like to thank the neighbor family to has done their best to support events like this. we would like to thank their sponsorship. we would like to thank mr. joseph davidson for his sponsorship and all the companies that have helped by donating time, who extend themselves way and beyond the call of duty to ensure that these events can happen in expanded manner.

they increased more and more. a round of applause, sure. we would like to thank the national park service, the united states police for their involvement and interaction. it is not easy to permit an event like this. we would like to thank the military for sending their support in the form of the president's home. we also like to thank our staff that each work to the tasks of three and four people each to make sure all those people were able to be part of this. we'll take one look at the crowd here tonight. we would like to thank all of you for coming out here in showing support for this most important events.

after we conclude with the songs of peace, we will invite everyone to get a little menorah to take some. they will help you get one. if not, you can go to nationalmenorah.org. if you'll please rise in your places. we can all sing these important things together.

>> please come and join me in thanking them. they put this magnificent celebration together. we could never be here. thank you rabbi shentow. >> thank you for helping but this music together. all the military personnel. thank you. ♪ ♪ [singing "song of peace"]

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ god bless america

land that i love stand beside her and guide her through the night with a light from above rom the moountains to the prairie to the ocean white with foam god bless america my home sweet home god bless america my home sweet home ♪ god bless america land that i love stand beside her and guide her from the night with a light from above

from the mountains to the prairies' to the oceans white with snow god bless america my home sweet home god bless america my home sweet home ♪ ♪ >> thank you, thank you. we have one more thank you to mention. that is for the community's security service would also serve as security for the jewish communities in here to help protect this of inspirit a very happy hanukkah.

have a safe trip home. we have done that to my right. good night. thank you very much one and all for coming. next, a discussion about the future broadcasts news media.

>> with the iowa caucuses next month, with the back of 40 men who ran for president and lost that have that long lasting impact on politics. here is a lineup. then on saturday, a three-time governor of new york house met followed by the liberal wing of the gop. it is every knighted him o'clock eastern. this weekend, at three days of american history television. this is the congressional cemetery. at 8:00, thomas on american prosperity in '50s and '60s. make the white house chefs a back to the carter administration. monday, highlights from c-span's coverage of the sanded

anniversary of the japanese attack on pearl harbor. >> reporters and media executives to discuss the future of broadcasting and news media. it was moderated by the times magazine editor. this is one hour and 10 minutes. >> it is appropriate that we are here at a museum of broadcast and indications. the question we're like to talk about is whether that is an oxymoron. how much broadcast is there any more? everything is delivered to you directly. there is no twitter museum yet. there are television and radio museums. museum is not always a great

word. it has to preserve something that is going away. there is still the radio. people still write poetry. it is all changing in ways that are dramatic. you will hear from this panel about what is going on and what the future holds. evan ratliff is one of the best magazine writers around. he wrote a fantastic piece a couple of years ago where he went off the grid. it was fantastic. he is here because he is the founder of --it was a fantastic pace. more importantly he is here because he is the founder of something called "the atavist," which i would recommend you all down lead. he has a many-publishing empire where he takes tax and puts it to music, video, enhancing in a way where all media will have to be going forward.

kara kara swisher is the editor of a site called allthingsd, and i have been reading her closely because she followed aol like nobody's business. and it was nobody's business. those folks like me who work at a company which used to be called a all-time warner read -- aol time warner read everything you wrote like it was the bible. joe mcginnis, the selling of the president, one of the seminal books about politics in america. it changed the way the people report about politics. he went outside the nixon campaign. it is a book i read a couple of years ago. it is incredibly well reported and well written. joe has written 11 books since

then. many of them bestsellers, including the series about the jeffrey macdonald murder case. he has been in the news once again because he rented a house next to sarah palin and has written a book that sarah palin -- sarah palin and her many fans do not think is great. that may be good for you. i was reading it this morning. ayman mohyeldin, the only time 100 honoree here. he used to be -- he worked for nbc many years ago. then he migrated to al jazeera where he had opportunity to do something that was a one left on -- once in a lifetime thing.

you're at the epicenter of something that i think is truly transformational. ayman has cast that in and is going back to nbc as a foreign correspondent. only in american media company would call an international correspondent of foreign correspondent. any place that is not america is far and. -- foreign. you will fix that. jim warren managed to figure out, how do i keep the best and most important of old media, shoe leather journalism, talking to people and going out and reported which he still does, mashing that with new media, twitter, facebook?

jim was the managing editor of the "chicago tribune." he now writes for other magazines and i think you will talk a little bit about that when we start talking. we're going to figure everything out for you today. we chatted beforehand and basically this is a conversation that all journalists have all the time. what is happening and what is the future? we will talk about what is happening now in the future. kara saw i had a piece of paper stuck to my foot, and then just said, print media. when i was walking out the door, the editor as me, why are you leaving? i said don, the water is rising and you are on the lower plane

at the "wall street journal." >> the first book where things were going wild. -- well. i was very adamant that this be the end of the newsprint, everything i was doing at the washington post. when i was walking out the door, and he asked why are you leaving? i said the water is rising in the lower plane at the wall street journal. won nothing felt was important to me was that new organizations did not understand what was happening. everyone else was covering -- one of the media reporters, that was the hot thing at them journal to be of media reporter, they said that you'll be covering cb radio.

that is what they called the internet. there was a smart executive there who funded it and let us do it. they were losing big retailers who were not advertising anymore. it was almost impossible not to see the implication on news and how was delivered. my premise was that people did not want news, they did not what the newspaper. i was not reading the newspaper. years later when it did a saturday journal, they had focus groups, but people liked about it. i thought it was hallmark. having to read it on saturday. i would sit in the back. they would say what you think about this? they finally got to me, what you think about the saturday journal? i wanted to put their money into online.

how can we get people to read the news? i said if you take a joint between every page that will work. [laughter] it would be fantastic. it would give you a new perspective on warren buffett. so i kept pushing and pushing. i was going to leave because they did not want to find -- fund a blog. this was 2001. i was pushing them. my partner and i threatened to leave. we believe this is the way it is going. there was a smart executive there who let us do it.

it has worked out well. itis still struggle within the journal for everyone to understand how quickly everything is changing. how you can do more with less. >> in that struggle, it is what people worry about. is this going away? i find it a strange question. never in the history of the world has there been more information available to more people in greater amounts and death in human history. in sunday's, it is the greatest -- in some ways, it is the greatest era of media. we have not figured out had to make money for it. you have a foot in both camps. how was it going to work? can they charge for it to? people like brands. they like the new york times. there are in different to the form that it takes. >> i am here in a museum. i did not see any of this coming.

i was clueless. when decisions are being made in the 1990's, it was almost like lbj and vietnam, 50,000 and then he had more soldiers on the ground. similar with the internet. you woke up and everyone was using the internet. you're giving it away. i come from an industry that has seen its revenue good to $24 -- go from $49 billion to $24 billion. they have come down crashing. one third of the people in newsrooms a decade ago are now gone. i agree with you that there is a lot of access instantaneously to lot of information.

if you look at the local level, this situation is very ambiguous. you cannot have 32 people covering the state legislature in this state. now they have a little bit above 20 to have major papers in the second biggest city pullout of the state legislature for financial reasons, and not have ambiguity about the quality of local content. we were born as a result of a tumultuous times at the tribune, and one of the bigger ones in the country, only 30 television stations and a lot of newspapers, they went into bankruptcy. we started as a small nonprofit. the good news is our main client, the new york times, we produce a couple of pages on friday and sunday, very happy with the product. the not so good news is do we have a sustainable business model? i think that is very unclear at this point.

whether the one will be able to get to folks, mostly the old foe is paying $700 to have the print subscription, to pay anywhere near that for the stuff that they may get online, and when we get into this later when it comes to politics, the lack of consensus, fragmentation, if personalization the media, there is a real potential loss in these local communities where many of the paper goes serve a social medicine, doing the things -- social mission, doing the things like the chicago tribune on the subject of the death count, robbing a long -- writing long exposes expo's these -- right team along expos days -- writing long expose about the death penalty.

there's some questions to be raised as we go along, and i have a distinct sense of a transitional period, as we head down another path, even with all the wonderful new means of twitter and facebook and all that at our disposal that can get a lot more information out to folks theoretically. there's still a big question about what happens at a local level if you do not have enough revenue to support a high enough quality staff so that you can have reporting in a sophisticated way, rather than some $35,000 deal or something like that. to me, that is the big question. what will be the sustainable model for any of these newly flowering, very idealistic, well intentioned organizations like ours? >> i will get to you in a second. one of the things you put your finger on and a worthy topic of discussion is, is the social

mission of what we all do. the constitution protect one industry, media. they did not have the word then, but it is the free press. you could not have a democracy without a free press. the mantra of the internet for years has been information wants to be free. i always think that people want reaffirmation. information does not want anything at all. but you talk about a sustainable model. putting something together that, i do not know, will people pay for? will preserve some of the traditional values by packaging it in a new form? >> that is what we're trying to do. that is what we have done so far. part of our premise starting out

was that you can actually do the stories that we do with a smaller scale, a smaller scale operation. instead of being a magazine that has 100 people working for it, we're very focused on paying the writers to go out to the world and report on something in debt, find the narrative story and bring that back and then we have a small system up fact checking, we have an in-house fact checker, but a is all contained and it is all around the story. you do not have to sell that many stories in order to make up what you have put out. so that as kind of like one premise that we have adopted, was, we wanted to have a small model that was able to make its money back and not make a profit and make money for the writers as well, and sending someone out for months it time, that is obviously going to cost money. but the way we sell our stories on the ipad and iphone and nook, we sell them as a book. that premise is where there is so much information, so much recent information, twitter, breaking news, all over the web, huffington post, that there might be a space for stories that are longer, that have more debt, where someone is spending time not only to get further into the story, but also to find that compelling narrative that makes it fun to read.

we are tackling that space assuming that, well, in the digital world, that is one of the hardest things to do. that is one of the things that the web has not done well, creating narrative longer than 2500 words. and we're finding that there is a niche in there. if you want to keep your overhead low, you can make money. and as a startup organization, we approach it as a tax startup, we are a news organization with a social values that you talk about and we have people spending half their time thinking of weekend's show a video and coded in today feed,

we're taking a very technology first approach to how we tell the story. >> and they are not just long. when people that historic to me, -- pitch a story to me, we can do a long story on x, the problem with your pitches the word long. but i think what you're doing is creating something that people might actually want to pay for. you're talking about people reading keith richards' autobiography. but i loved the book. i was so frustrated that i could

not hear music and see video while i was reading it. the future of book publishing will be things like that. but speaking of long form, you are a master of a long form, and you have been doing it the long time. even in "the selling of the president," it was about how people shape to the views of the audience in terms of the content that is produced. one of the controversies your book has pointed up is the idea that in the new media world, people can not -- because it is all pull the not pushed -- you can find a point of view that agrees with you and you are not forced to read a contrary opinion. is that part of the reaction to your book? >> i am not so sure about that. but i did think that i sit here as the dinosaur in the room. probably the only person here who is collecting social security. but that does not mean i am not interested in the future. i like to think that i still have a future. however, the kind of work i have

been doing for 40 years has been dependent on the economic model of publishing, reaching an audience, making the publisher field that they want to invest in your in your next book and not just throw money down a dream. -- down a drain. some books i could never get a contract to write them because the potential audience is simply not big enough. one of the other things that has happened over recent years that i think has been a real step backwards has been the failure of magazine journalism to sustain itself. back in the selling of the president days, there were so many magazines, weekly and monthly, harper's, the atlantic, the saturday evening post, that printed long form journalism.

that word to not exist but it was a story. almost all of them have gone by the wayside. i have a friend named tom juno, one of the best magazine writers in america, worked for esquire, and we were talking recently about a couple of story ideas and i said, gee, that might be in egypt -- in interesting thing for me to do for esquire. and he said they are not hiring in the house side writers. -- any outside writers. it is all produced by the staff. what if i had a story that i wanted to tell that the magazine is not going to want to -- the magazines are not there anymore. alas magazine story i wrote was about sarah palin's nonexistent natural gas pipeline. it was in her next-to-last issue. i did not quite close it up but i came close. i spent three weeks in alaska researching that story. without padding, my expenses came to $12,000. most magazines will not even pay the fee of $12,000 anymore. what is a writer to do? this is where i look at the gentleman to my right and i

look at "the atavist" and i say this as my savior. this is where we can still do the kind of work i like to do. we do not have to make decisions on simply commercial but tell the stories that we want to tell and reach of smaller audience. he can make money because he does not have the overhead. i think that "the atavist" is one of the most important steps forward. they're very few people who support themselves solely by writing anymore. i have a lot of novelist friends who already said that the one thing that would never do is teach. i can find them now on faculties all over the country because they cannot sell their books. now they are teaching. likewise, the work i am doing, most nonfiction books are not written by people who make a living at it.

people are either connected to an organization, like kara rights and excellent book but does not make a living as a book writer. the book is something extra. another writer for the new yorker writes books as a supplement. talese is one, and another is still working, but not many other people are out there. no new people are coming into writing nonfiction for a living because there is no living to be made at it. if it is not a celebrity biography, which maybe we think sarah palin is a celebrity biography, but basically that kind of books, the best nonfiction writers have always been interested in planting, the market seems to have disappeared, not entirely, not entirely. obviously there are good new books, but for the mid level, the writer who is not a star or a guaranteed best seller, the publishers will not pay the

money, the magazines are not there anymore, so you need something like "the atavist" to keep this tradition of paternalism alive. -- journalism alive. >> and there are other forms of that. single evokes, and one of the -- kindle singles, and one of the things that we have done that time, we had a cover story about the new thinking about the civil war. it came in at 10,000 words. we were on we going to run 5000 words. it became a kindle single. it did not make a lot of dough, but that is in the future. you started out in what used to the new media -- television and broadcast journalism. let them know how this change for you. because no one can do just one thing anymore. i am sure you have pressure to

tweet, to blog, to write stories online. you said that nbc looked on like other networks has a 24 hour cable. it has the msnbc web site and a panoply things. but that means that you have to do all of those things. >> yes, and in my perspective, i think there is a huge difference between information and knowledge. we all sit in this room and a bomb could go off in afghanistan and within minutes we would get it on our messages and facebook and twitter. but very few of us will understand why that actually happened. there's a difference between knowledge and information. the difference between media and journalism. at the end of today, good journalism will ultimately sell. what we are challenged with now and i think what the american public have grown frustrated with is one way journalism,

where that journalists is an off formal setting, holds the microphone, and tells you what the most important story is. but it may not be what you think is the most important story. what is changing is that there is a much more viewer-reporter involvement. so many times, even coming up here, i greeted and asked people what they thought was the future of journalism. i got a tremendous amount at the book of people -- feedback from people. if there is a good product, people will buy it. that is what itunes shows us and kindle shows us. i use it to news gather and to disseminate.

there are so many times in the middle east where something is happening in syria, journalists are not allowed to get in, a military attack on a small village, i can get on twitter and message the people that follow me. within seconds, i will say -- i would get a number or a contact. i will get that information and do that journalism part, verify, report, and use the same technology used to get the information to disseminated to the public. this is become a two-way street. i would never have been able to get that content from my sources, but i was not able to disseminate without that same technology. >> so, again, you put out a tweed. -- tweet. what is the future of journalism? >> i think the constant thing that i got was not being told. media should not be beholden to the interest of the few that define the rundown, so to speak. it is all about your involvement and your engagement.

people want to be able to understand what is happening. they do not want to be told information. they want to be involved in the knowledge process and the analysis of that information. >> can go the other way? i was just on the fox news show this morning in chicago, and just before my segment, they had a story about the red sox general manager, probably going to take over the chicago cubs. they put out a thing on the screen, tell us what you think. will he do it? then there was an entire three- minute segment where they showed the responses they were getting from viewers and saying this is what so and so things, this is what's so and so things. -- thinks. of what value is that? that gets you an audience, guess, but to me, it is wasting a lot of time. >> it is discouraging in a way. if you look at the surveys done about internet use and sites like amazon, people trust.

valuations more than they trust traditional journalism -- they trust peer evaluations more than they trust traditional journalism. to people understand journalism and what role it plays? if they value the opinions of their peers, what value is it for a man like yourself saying what is important and why? >> there is less a sense of that and what are trustworthy sources and on interest was a pace sources. it is a complicated issue and deals with the educational system and a lack of civics education, people not knowing the difference between the person blabbing on fox or msnbc, kara and, kara who may have taken two weeks to assess the

problem. we are also partly to blame if you take political coverage. i think we have simply taken the political system's obsession over the last 20 or 30 years for making mountains out of molehills, for going negative, and tactics and strategy has fed right into that. you get the echo chamber if you look at the debate coverage of the republican debates this morning, and watch the mainstream media and, you will see stories about statecraft and are at best -- artifice and about how people are trying to position themselves. i was looking a more distant than i plan, and i lifted a blimps are restored. -- i stumbled across a bloomberg story. not only did i learn about substantial economic issues but they seemingly sophisticated analysis of what they were saying.

that when romney says that obama healthcare plan calls $1 billion, it is bs. when perry says that he created 50,000 taxpayer funded jobs in texas, that is bs. when herman cain talks about balancing the budget, it is absolutely, totally impossible. but i do worry about whether or not someone growing up with an ipad will have a sense of where there is an error of authority. you work for a network news operation which is in some ways imperil the by some of the very technology that it is employing. a quick demonstration cairo, and i do not have to wait for my friend brian williams. i will not wait for bryan williams, because whether it is on my mobile device or on my mac, i'll be seeing dozens of video from tahrir square. i have no clue who i might trust.

how do i sort that out, not hating on consumer journalist, but the guy at patterson, new jersey, going on youtube, and there are 50 videos of the demonstrations? >> i have to disagree with you. maybe i am not wearing a blue blazer. >> our pants a different color. >> that said, there is nothing wrong with these people speaking up. there is no reason to abandon ethics and at that same time have fairness. " we believe that all those things are critically important. including that you trust our brand. at the same time, incredibly valuable things being brought up by readers. i have always thought that readers were smarter than i was. when e-mail was just coming out, at reporters rely quite you want to hear from the reader?

i would say that they know things and they tell me stuff. the argument that come from old media that this stuff is not trustworthy or is not right, it is not vetted. that is not entirely true. first of all, i love in your -- new york times but it is a bunch of white dudes and a lady who all live on the upper east side. >> upper west side. >> it is the same people. it is the same people. secondly, if people are smart and they can rise above this. they can rise above the noise and you will get patrols but -- trolls but you'll get a much more rich and valuable system -- you will get the trolls, but you get a much more rich and valuable system. we have a respect for the story as it is ongoing. and it can get better and better. keep in mind, getting more video adds richness to the store. -- story. >> kara, lest i get characterized as a luddite who grew on the upper west side and wearing a blue blazer.

>> your tie is fantastic. >> i got it in london. [laughter] i think it is great that all that stuff is out there.

. .

what are the risks for china coming from the u.s.? the economic and political relations? >> european pivot is welcome by china. they see europe and giving china a more attention. the american pivot toward china as was discussed a couple of weeks ago, has raised tensions. they see this as a resurfacing of u.s. objectives, a return to a dominant role in asia.

these pivots have a different perception within china. this is an election year coming. the transfer of power in china to the next generation of leadership. these political events are going to complicate the economic discussions. it begins with the anti-currency bill and it is showed -- showing upper elsewhere the terps on the engines going into china are being looked at him negatively on the hill. their effort to protect these problems. china sees this as tit-for-tat in terms of the tariffs which were slapped upon their exports to the united states.

of a larger significance is the barriers better restricting u.s. exports of chicken feed. it accounts for $300 million in exports to china. it is useless in united states but china is trying to restrict those. it is looking for things which they can hit at but not what i would call a big issues. nevertheless they are concerned that any negative sentiments which emerged during this political process in china and united states is going to cloud the financial relations between the countries. this technology transfer, the

tensions which are showing which your reader -- are probably more important in the future. dc owner -- solar panel case, should the u.s. be promoting green technology here, is being subsidized here? to what extent is china subsidizing the development in a big way. the competition and the fallout, you'll probably see 60% of the capacity of china being wiped out in the coming year. it is a problem that aggravates producers and governments of both sides. they will say is a problem shared rather than one side or the other. >> china-u.s. relations? >> i think both sides realize how incredibly important this

financial relationship is. it is not a subject on which a claim to have a lot of expertise. it is obvious that the relationship is not only extremely important but extremely stressful. it is stressful because there is a basic lack of trust between the two giants. one of the biggest victims of the 2008 financial crisis i fear, is chinese respect for the american economic system and in particular the financial system. that is hard to measure. it is important because there has been a subtle shift in chinese perceptions of the united states prior to the crisis. that was never explosively expressed. the american economic model was the chinese model. china feels their model is not

so bad after all. maybe they have already done enough in terms of economic reforms. that is a very dangerous conclusion if it persists and takes hold of the decision- making process of the top leadership. i am still hopeful that is not the case. during my recent visit to beijing last week, i was actually a pleasantly surprised by how many people kept stressing the need for further financial sector reforms. that was a surprise to me. another encouraging element is that prior to my visit, you have fairly high level discussions in beijing. add to the american announcement that they would go forward with arms deliveries to

tie one in the beginning of the year, the chinese reaction was to let's cool it on the relationship. i believe that has to be a physical part of the relationship. fortunately, for reasons i don't understand, the situation moves in a positive direction and were helpful in beijing prior to my visit last week. >> i don't have anything to add? >> the trade frictions with disgust and the discussion on the currency illustrate that the rise of china is not smooth. the fact that the united states has to give up some of its dominance is not the smoothest of processes. looking forward, that can become worse. it can go into more areas with more and more chinese companies wanting to invest in the united

states which would be very natural process. there are other potential sources for disputes. if the chinese are competing more directly with u.s. companies, you have more friction. if china becomes more dominant in the financial markets, you have more conflict. at the same time, we should not overemphasize the importance of the bilateral relationship between china and u.s.. sometimes we think that is the only thing that matters. that is not true. we're moving towards a multi- country level. the importance of developing countries outside china is more important than looking at all counties together. it is important for china not

to kids into focus on only as relations with the united states. they have to think about the relation with the other emerging countries. >> excellent, i would like to open it up to the audience, please. introduce yourselves, affiliation, name, before you ask the question. the gentleman there in the middle. - >> thank you. >> please stand up and tell us who you are. >> thank you for organizing this time the event. -- timely event. i am with the chinese news agency. recently, if britain is reluctant to give its share to the 200 bureaus, european countries have not got the $200 billion euros for that prized.

in china, a step in our step out for this particular time -- as for the united states, due to the strong opposition from republican senators, the have not given the 108 billion euros. for countries like mexico and china, they have their cost and benefit analysis. is not related to the voting share. this is my first question and secondly, there are differences among the important players for countries like germany going to to the general resources.

for countries like the united states, they want money going to special accounts to reduce the contagion across the imf membership. how should countries seldom -- solve the given problems. >> good questions. let me take a couple more and we will come back. after that, the gentleman who just stood up. >> thank you, with the the world affairs council. the panel basically things that a hard landing is unlikely in china but if there is a hard landing what would be the political impact on china?

you already talked a bit about a lot of bankruptcies and with bankers is would come a lot of unemployed people, this is a time about heavy-handed activities in china of various kinds. would we see some political ferment in china? >> and then the gentleman who had stood up before? >> i am retired. when i see the topic you have chosen, global economic outlook, a wonder whether you can really? countries like brazil and india. you mentioned the multi-global development. i am wondering whether you can ignore them. i was also surprised that you did not at all, not once, mention employment. in the united states, there is no doubt that the next election will be heavily influenced by

the quite significant unemployment. the shift in consumption and production, how come you did not also mention employment patterns because they are so important? you take the question about the impact on politics. i will give a stab at the year a question. -- euro question. >> i could not agree more. i briefly mentioned the slowdown in brazil and india but it is an important phenomenon in both

countries. increasingly important for the global economy. if we saw a sharper slowdown, and due to domestic policies and to the reaction to a sharp increase in domestic demand in the time before. those are independent developments that interact with the rest of the economy but should be considered when we're doing our economic prospects. then the unemployment issue is also important. even broader, when we're talking about the high income countries, we're not talking about just a normal recession. there is a fundamental structural problem -- problem in the high income countries of a lack of growth. indeed fundamental changes to

come out of this situation. for years we're talking about the fact that it will take many years before -- it takes many years and it takes reforms. the political system is not ready to take those steps. that is a difficult problem. if you look at the middle east, you have your link with unemployment and a link with structural changes also. there's a lot that should be thought about. >> economics and politics in china. >> the papers are full of discussion of this issue. a fishing village where 13,000 residents are protesting and the top leadership is trying to

negotiate a fair outcome. this is indicative of a large increase of social unrest in china. it would make things worse if there was a hard landing. if you ask about the economic factories which are likely to impinge upon politically related sensitivities, i would cite a couple. there is an example of the battle over land rights and how land is used and developed and tax and who owns it. a major issue and they have not been able to deal with this. this is a source of tension in china. what would happen if we had a collapse over disparities? the disparities in china are spatial in nature. it is not like what it is in the united states, singapore, and malaysia.

the urban and rural -- 3.5%, the highest in the world. that is how you deal with this. the third issue has to deal with the social protection programs in china. are they going to be strong enough? the social protection programs in china are not as strong as they should be. if you have a collapse, you have to ask whether it will increase the tension. the answer is it will. if incomes collapse, you'll have some problems with locality and with everyone. it depends on who will be hit most by that.

i think the social programs are in a state of development there. >> thank you. pieter? >> on the question of social unrest becoming more political and in response to it hard landing, it is important to realize there is social unrest in china today. it is rising. how much of that social unrest is political in nature is hard to ascertain. my sense is that most social unrest is focused on local grievances. local pollution programs and things like that. if the rate were to drop to a hard landing situation, 5% or so, it is likely that social unrest would intensify in china

and it would assume a more political nature. i do not know what happened after that. this government has been able to maintain high growth. social unrest is on the rise. the microblogging is surely on one hand a source of greater grievances because they can be more easily share. but it is also a safety valve on the system. people can now express themselves more safely through the internet. it is hard to say. my sense is that china is politically stable, much more stable than most people's realize. >> let me take a stab at the

euro question. i think it is good news is that they have committed $200 million to increase imf general resources. i think that's the good news. the u.k. has not set that they will not contribute. they have said they will consider a contribution early in the new year and they would prefer to do that in the context of a broader g-20 initiative. the u.k. is a little bit the odd man out at the moment in europe for all the reasons that you have been falling. indeed, the u.s. congress is undergoing difficult debate on

the previous expansion of imf resources. i am among the very small number of people who are daring to propose that in the event of an escalation of the european crisis that would set the stability of the system -- increased imf resources should be directed to europe and that requires a u.s. contribution as well as chinese contribution. there are very few takers on this view, but i guess that is why i work in a think-tank. [laughter] i am paid to think. if italy cannot repay the debt,

that is the united states' problem as well as germany's problem. that is the view that i maintain. i think the chinese will be following the same logic. there was a big coordination problem. but in the end, you cannot say we will -- that just does not make any sense. >> i work for the state department. i would like to ask a geopolitical question that connects with everything you have been talking about. china has looked internally for enemies or potential problems. with the recent death of kim

jong il, the huge energy resources pouring into asia which they see as some of it as a quasi-threat. how is china going to react? they have a huge domestic problems. we're kind of shaking them with what they see as a potential circumvented, but it does appear that we have to circumvent policy. how do think the chinese leadership when the deal with this and the military says come the americans are redesigning the security architect in the region. how are you going to respond to that? i think a huge battle will take place. the chinese will go through the leadership change as well.

i think it is extremely sensitive. >> we will come back to that and take a couple more. the lady in the back and i will come to you, as well. >> thank you. i'm with a newspaper in china. you said china should provide financial assistance if the conditions are right. one of the conditions should be that the u.s. should also contribute. the u.s. government is reluctant to even talk about the possibility of providing resources. a few members raised their eyebrows even before this issue becomes a fully engaging issue in the congress.

do you think now is the time for the u.s. to consider providing financial assistance to european countries? thank you. >> the answer is yes. i just said it. >> molly williamson. thank you for this viable presentation. u.s. china-relationship around two vehicles -- thank you for this valuable presentation. energy and the environment. the united states and china are the number one and number two producers of energy. can we work together in the disposition to see things in more competitive rather than

cooperative terms of the other other ways to work together? >> maybe we will take one more and come back to the panel. there is a hand in the back. yeah. >> thank you very much. i'm wondering if the panel could comment on chinese bilateral engagement with individual european countries, specifically on the periphery. how'd you see this affect the overall eu policy towards china, maybe in the areas of human rights? how do you see european high- technology transfers? is it too early to see them at jumping the gun?

i think this was an issue with chinese-eu relations in the past. thank you very much. >> maybe pieter, you want to start us off on the geopolitical situation, u.s.- china, the pivot, etc. how do you see that? >> it is an area of great concern to the united states and the whole world. the global shifts about which we are speaking are also reflected in strategic changes in the strategic equations.

you mentioned some of them. i'm not so sure that the chinese know exactly where they are heading them sales. -- themselves. i think they'll put claims at have expressed deep worries about the american presence in dublin. whether they are as worried about that seem to suggest i do not know. only 30 years ago, these questions were outside the radar screen of even the most senior chinese. nobody gave it any thought. we should be careful not to jump to conclusions about attitudes on these changing patterns. my sense is that's they wish to become a global power and they

wish to be not only a global economic power but also eight military power, at least a strong regional military power. that poses a challenge for the u.s. it will take a lot of wisdom to deal with these challenges. channeling these energies in a stable direction. these challenges are facing china as they are facing the u.s. >> i would add a few things. this is a tough issue for china. they see the pivot as increasing tensions in the region. they see the privet is something they inadvertently encouraged, because they took it hard line over the past several years. i figure the government is realizing that the best way to deal with this in the military security issues is to try to

soften their image in the region. otherwise there would encourage more of these tensions. particularly in a year when china is going through a leadership change, they do not want to see more stress. the longer term depends on what the u.s. reaction is and the priorities of the chinese government. on climate change, to make it is interesting. we have a a heated debate about climate change in the united states. there is not a heated debate in china on this. there state council is 95% technocrats. they don't have a personal opinion. the united states, the

leadership is not a scientists. ofy'd like to debate a lot things. they are hung up on these issues of whether targets should be treated the same as developed countries. there is a course of strong commitment in the united states. there should be ways to collaborate. the technology aspect is likely to continue to be developed here. the broad based manufacturing aspect are likely to be done in china. is there a potential for a relationship? yes, there is. apple. apple's technology -- everything is developed in this country. apple products are manufactured

in china. that is a win-win. that is the same issue as climate change technology. both sides feel like they are gaining something out of this. the u.s. does not feel they are gaining the necessary share to make this a true partnership. >> i would like to follow up on the climate change issue and help you achieve more cooperation to solve the global problems and to provide the goods. or cooperation between the high-income countries. i think what is needed is that there will be a fundamental change in the dynamic of the process. the process has always been

that the high-income countries, they come up with a global solution and they give it to developing countries and they say, that has too much or the characteristics of this is of interest to high-income countries. i'm not interested and it is your problem, so thank you very much. you have the same kind of a dynamics. countries are thinking globally and then trying to push a in three other countries. what has to change is the countries have to start thinking globally, think about the global problem from a vested

interest of developing countries, which have to grow, and put that on the table. the high-income countries should start reacting to that. what you saw in durban was a small step in that direction. china was much more committed than before, and so the developing countries are able to think through as part of the global solution and then you change the dynamics. but we're not there yet. many developing countries have not found their voice yet to think globally, and the high- income countries are not ready to be on the receiving end. >> does anybody want to pick up on the european investments, what the europeans want? >> what is the chinese

relationship to individual european countries, in addition to their relationship with brussels. my sense is that the chinese are playing both sides and they have active relationships with the major european countries. and with the european institutions in brussels, there is it high-level strategic dialogue between brussels and beijing which precedes the strategic dialogue between the united states and china. the dialogue was started at a high level by secretary paulson in the w. bush administration.

europe is very important from china's perspective and an important source of new technologies. that comes from brussels, which is a large program for china and also from the individual member countries. >> other questions. this gentleman in the middle. >> i just got back from two weeks in beijing. i had a lot to do with younger people. i heard dissent. they were expressing irritation on the controls put on them on internet and news and various things. i wonder if the panel has a view if that is an exception or something new happening in the

country. >> the lady there. melissa. >> thank you very much. i have a comment. we have seen a tremendous shift of power is how will the government has been able to deal with some money issues. we see the risks of trade increasing. to what extent do thing the coming elections will spill into protectionist reaction. the success of the system that people did nothing would perform so well. we've seen a tremendous crisis n democracies dealing with the big structural change because of a population and the fiscal

crisis. when do you think the west will get real about dealing with these things? the focus has been on the short term, two to four years. what is going to take before this happens? >> the last question was related to china, right -- or was it more broadly? >> we have china doing very well. havingeeing democracies lots of trouble with things that have to be done to deal with the fall of the financial crisis in a much more competitive economy. we see a lack of reality in washington and europe in dealing with this issue. what is going to take for this

to sink in? >> good. there was a lady there. >> i'm margaret pearson from the university of maryland. your assertion about a coronation problem. we have heard a tremendous evidence that there seems to be a coordination problem. everybody thinks that the europeans and the banks and there is a major source of solutions. at the same time, the u.s. needs to step been, the chinese need to step in. imf seems to be sitting back and waiting for europe to be the central motivator for this as well.

looking for a sliver of hope about how these coordination problems can get solved. if europeans go to great extent then they have so far to solve the problem -- where is this initiative going to come from beyond the europeans doing what they need to do to get the multi lateral and the great power cord nation in as well? it is a process question. >> we have a question on protests and on the internet, and we have a question about protectionism in china. we have other questions. yukon, you want to -- >> on the use issue and the concerns about the restrictions on the internet and the

individual rights. we have to realize this is the generation has no direct contact or context of the cultural revolution and the aftermath in terms of -- basically saying excesses' have to be dealt with very hard because of the promise. they do not see that as a necessary aspect of their country. so the government coming down much harder it will increase. it will increase because the employment opportunities are getting more serious in upcoming years. i would say the university crowd is getting restless. >> good. protectionism, the risk of

protectionism under the new government. pieter? will it make a difference? >> how the government will change and the policies on trade. it is hard to predict at this time. you'll have a wholesale change at the politburo level at the opening of the congress sometime in the fall of 2012. if anybody feels confident predicting what impact it'll have, i am not one of those. i came away from my most recent visit, and the people i talk to

are keenly aware of the open trade channels in china. they would like to have -- we saw the duties on certain vehicles, trucks and suv's. is inclined to think that not so important. to go for an open trading system as much as they can and from wto membership and any other country. few people are engaging that question that. -- in beijing question that. yes, there will be trade frictions, particularly with the united states. i would expect china to open up even further. >> hans, do you want to take a stab at the second question, the reforms that are needed to reflect this big global change

and why they are not happening? >> let me link it to some of the other questions. to some extent, there are structural changes also. it would be important -- it is a coordination problem. not everybody agrees with that. some say the problem with europe is too much coordination and you don't have the flexibility to do your own stuff and to react in your own way to your own problems. i believe it is a fundamental problem. they are too integrated to deal with the problems.

you have to rescue banks and you have to supervise banks, and that is still done at an individual country level and that creates fiscal problems in many problems that then have to be solved and goes back to the banking sector. it is difficult to get coordination because there are different interests in different countries. ultimately the european parliament understands that the only solution is to have certain issues more organized. europe is now ahead of the united states because in europe, at least both for the european union, steps are taken to solve those longer-term issues.

if you look at individual companies like italy and -- countries like italy and portugal, if you look at the reforms they are implementing at the moment, you have these long term elements in there, and that its ultimate what is needed. the discussion is about now and it is and not based on a vision where you want to be. the inability of governments to deal with that. the social unrest. i think pieter said it already. that is not just a problem when there are adversities. in china, you have the educated people that now are in a different way educated than

even 10 years ago. in china you have the emerging middle class that wants to have a say. in the middle east, it was not just poverty. people came out of college but could not get a job. it is difficult to do what the consequences of progress. the ultimate example you see in the high-income countries where you have a lot of progress but the politics is no longer able to take the next step and so your stuck. >> good. on the euro question, the process, as you asked -- i think the first step of the process has made progress in the last week for two.

-- or two. the first step of the process is the europeans have put in a significant additional chunk of change. the european central bank has stepped up its support to the banking system, issuing three- year loans. it is less demanding collateral requirements. this is part of the safety net. everybody knows that the european central bank is acting at the moment to stabilize the bond market, and for good reasons. there is no explicit policy on that in order to maintain pressure on the country's in the prairie. -- periphery.

so i think the first step is there -- to maintain pressure on the countries on the periphery. there was a serious discussion that took place. the message from the last meeting of the g-20 was that the europeans have to get their house in order. they have to come up with a credible plan and they have to put money on the table. i don't think they have done that to the extent that they should. to be frank, i doubt whenever things you put in place that you'll get a large involvement outside of europe, unless the united states is in the lead. so, you place your bets.

how might it happen? unfortunately, it might happen under duress. there was a financial panic and it was accepted by the congress a week later. that kind of circumstance may develop. then the treasury's around the world will be on the phone to each other and the key senators will be called, etc. then the situation might change. i do not know. i do believe it is unlikely that large package will be negotiated without the u.s. involved. i think we will take one more round.

the lady there. >> thank you. i am with china central television washington bureau. in recent months, we see the economic indicators -- housing data and also the gdp figure that is prone to be released tomorrow will probably be a positive. can we take these as signs of economic recovery? you mentioned the upcoming presidential campaign next year. what should the government make the most in order to prop the economy?

>> we will take one more and turned over to the panel. i'll ask them to make any final 30-second interventions. >> i fall op with her question -- follow up with her question and would like to link some other points. we talk about global. you touched on the euro, asian markets. you touched on the issue -- the approach of the -- how china will react to that? it is related to energy and jobs and employment and the question about the economy. how you see the future investment of china in the u.s. at manufacturers and creating

jobs in this country? >> that is a large number of questions. i will ask you to pick a couple of them, yukon and pieter. but first, hans, do you want to comment on the united states and give us your 30-second parting message? >> the positive news in recent days in the united states is good news because it shows that the u.s. is not sliding into recession. it is not good news because now all the problems are over. this is kind of a rebound that comes after a weak first half year. you should look at it in cyclical terms and almost the

technical changes, but not as an administration where problems have been solved. the investment in the housing sector is still 1 divided by stories below where was before the crash -- is still 1/3. you get a recovery from restructuring the economy and we are far from that. i'm seeing it in a positive way, but i'm still worried about the other countries including the united states -- high-income countries. my last 30 seconds is very much in line with the question about all the other events in the world. i'm surprised that in these discussions, we never touched on africa. if you look ahead, then there are fascinating developments in

africa. many countries are growing 6% a year. many countries have seen the fundamental reforms in their economy. it is a continent that is rich in resources and can benefit from the chinese interest. 10 years from now, we will look back and say, something happened in africa. we did not talk about latin america at the moment. the situation is fundamentally different from what it was 10 years ago and they play a different role in the global economy. that means for me that in these discussions we are still too much focus on what is happening in the high-income countries. but the world is getting bigger and bigger. >> thank you, hans. >> a quick comment about these regional agreements. whether it is east asia or whatever as you go -- it is

getting confusion. -- confusing. they have overlapping responsibilities whether on trade or financial responsibility. i think there will be some shaking out over how much is overlap or increases the focus. they have some views -- some of these things are not working out the way they would like. the objectives i think are sensible ones. i find it hard to see how you can go at those objectives without china's participation. what is not a grouping that we are not asked to be encouraged. the security issues of that region.

the last comment i would make -- china's links are important to china. it is very much in favor of an open economy. it wants to increase the capital flow. the big issue for china is how to increase the flow out to establish a more direct relationships. you have to encourage more money to flow out of china, and it should. look at the former soviet union. he saw the soviet currency collapsed -- you saw the soviet currency collapsed. they realize it made sense to diversify their holdings.

eight reshaping the portfolios which changed the value in the future -- a reshaping of the portfolios. >> 30 seconds. answer to those questions. take your pick. >> the global economic outlook is extraordinarily concerned and complex at this point. the three major economic pillars -- the united states, europe, and china are all facing very difficult conditions. if the u.s. is unable to come to terms with the fiscal issues facing this country, it is hard to be optimistic about the longer-term outlook. if europeans cannot come up with a plausible solution, to the heart to be optimistic about

europe -- it is hard to be optimistic. china is the least troublesome of the three. the economy is still growing very fast. all the layoffs in the manufacturing sector we are observing don't translate into higher levels of unemployment. inna's real wages manufacturing are still rising. this is still like fast-growing economy despite the slowdown, which is broad based and has been going on for the last 12 months and will continue for the next 12 months. i don't want to discount the risks. i cannot assess the political risks. i think china will be able to manage a slowdown in such a way that they will benefit in

economically structuring -- we see the imbalance is coming down. the surplus is unlikely to be higher than about 3% this year. the domestic consumption growth rate -- the data suggests that the extreme imbalance between china's share of consumption in gdp of the lowest in the world -- household consumption has been growing faster than gdp. that is what is needed to bring about some restoration. the big concern is that the leadership change that is coming in twelve months -- a new team will make big mistakes. team will make big mistakes.