they want to make sure you know about tomorrow. we will be featuring carol lee to discuss the florida primary. also joining her will be aaron sharockman. we will also have david coleman to talk about presidential records and the recent release

of the tape recordings from the jfk museum. we will be featuring anne-marie slaughter, a foreign-policy expert, who will talk about rising tensions between the international community and syria and iran. thank you for joining us this morning on "washington journal." we will see you back here tomorrow at 7:00. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> day live road to the white

house coverage continues from florida with a mitt romney rally beginning at 1:45 eastern. we will take you live to newt in west palmeech beach at 8:00 p.m. eastern. that is all today on c-span. >> i arrived in paris. i walked into the hotel lobby and met him for the first time. he said he just wanted to be on the cover of "rolling stone." >> he wrote about u.s. and nato forces in the june issue of "rolling stone." >> i told him it was between him and lady gaga. he said to put him and lady gaga

in a part-shaped -- heart-shaped tub. >> michael hastings continues the story and talked about his new book on sunday night. >> i do believe the west, for all of its shortcomings, still today represents the most acceptable and workable political culture. >> in 1991, the united states was the only global superpower. today, how to restore its status in the world, tonight at 10:00

p.m. eastern. also this weekend, did fdr use ww ii as a cover to create a more powerful executive branch? but tv is every weekend on c- span region book tv -- book tv is every weekend on c-span2. >> we will hear the state of the indian nation address and we will hear from congressman called. this is one hour and 15 minutes.

>> welcome to our state of indian nations event. it is the largest, oldest organization in washington representing the tribal governments across the country. i would like to welcome our distinguished guests. we have many folks listening to us across the country. across the country, we have students, tribal citizens, and leaders who had gathered to watch the event together. we are pleased that mr. starr's history class in santa fe, new mexico, is joining us. we have the center for native american youth in washington,

d.c., and the indian tribe of wisconsin, the leaders of tomorrow and today watching. there are many others watching across the country. we are happy they are all joining us. we have an incredible turn out today. i would like to acknowledge some of the guests in the audience. among the special guest, we have our board members of in see a i -- ncai. we are also joined by tribal leaders across the country. some of those are chairman hays. among our federal partners, we ave trepresentative tom cole

and aaron klein from treasury. we also have our native organization partners. finally, i want to thank our tribal and public radio stations across the country for airing today's address and bringing the state of indian nations to hundreds of thousands of people in indian country and beyond. we have asked an american indian, active duty service military members to introduce keel.dent kil -- it is my pleasure to introduce the u.s. navy judge advocate from the pentagon. colonel punting --

huntinghorse, please join me in welcoming him here today. [applause] >> president keel was unanimously reelected to a second term as the president i am here to represent service members and veterans. it is an honor to serve and protect all citizens of the united states, including the members of america's first nation. there are thousands of active- duty service members and over 3000 native veterans who know the great sacrifice to protect

our freedom and sovereignty. one of these great veterans is president keel, a retired u.s. army officer with over 20 years of active duty service. he has translated that sense of duty into serving the indian country and building a stronger america. the president of the national congress of indian americans, president jefferson keel. [applause] >> thank you for the warm introduction. i want to thank the native service members and veterans who have joined us today. many know the stories of indian country, the challenges we have faced, and the ones we face today. few americans know the story of the hundreds of thousands of tribal members who have served in the united states military as far back as the revolutionary war. as a veteran, i want to thank

the colonel and the 24,000 active duty american indian service members serving to protect the united states in the tribal members of north america. [applause] my fellow tribal leaders, tribal citizens, american citizens, members of the national congress of american indians, members of the administration, members of the 112 congress, those listening or watching today, i am honored to speak to you and especially to address representatives of the more than 5 million native people and 566 tribal nations of indian country. [applause] the state of indian nations is strong. our nations are strong. our people are strong.

the strength of our nation is our inheritance. the state of indian nations should be defined by what we commit to right now to make the state of indian nations even stronger in the years to come. we all know that tribes have faced difficult history. we are rising from harsh economic conditions to contribute to a more prosperous tomorrow. tribes have been doing more with less for generations. i am here today to outline a path to overcome our shared challenges. i will lay out specific economic changes and improvements for our tribal nations. some of these changes require legislative action. many others can come from direct action by the administration. ultimately, it will be the actions of many people that contains their nations and community. native people are the first americans, tribal nations are

the first governments of this country. it is one of the three sovereigns' recognized in the united states constitution. our america is a place where each citizen contributes to a prosperous future. to achieve that vision, we need leaders who understand that indian country matters, especially in a presidential election year. we are all aware of the impact an election can have on indian country. in recent years, many have come to learn of the door swings both ways. indian country can have a significant impact on elections and became-changing. as the grandmothers on the reservation and young people go to the ballot box this november, they're standing on the shoulders of those who fought hard for that right. as students, and veterans cast

their vote, they are reminding america that we matter. ofthe 1940's, thousands native veterans returned home to a shocking reality. america had accepted them on the battlefield, but had no place for them at the ballot box. ira hayes raised the flag at iwo jima. he returned home to the land he defended and was denied the right to vote. the soldier returned home to new mexico and was denied the right to vote. these american heroes inspired the fight all the way to the federal courts for the right to participate in the 1948 elections. they expressed the power of the native goat for the first time -- native vote for the first

time. it has been networks -- at work ever since. we will work tirelessly in 2012 to see the highest native vote turnout ever. [applause] we know it can be done. on the reservation in montana, turnout rates are regularly over 80%. a survey of seniors at ucla shows native young people participate at rates higher than any other group of students. this is especially important because almost half a million native youth will be eligible to vote for the first time in the next quarter years. native people do not see the world in the election cycles. we're focused on building stronger communities generations

to come. when we step in the ballot box, we want to vote for candidates who stand with tribal nations to create strong, prosperous futures. we're not motivated -- mobilizing for one party or candidate. for us, it is "i" for indian. [applause] we are independent voters. we will continue to vote for the candidate who is strong on our issues and cares about our priorities. today, i am calling on all presidential candidates to make sure indian country is at the table during the campaign and throughout your administration. these actions should form the can. -- the foundation of your native american policy platform. we call on the president to send a special message to congress on the importance of the

relationship. in 1970, president nixon sent a historic message to congress on tribal self-determination. that message launched a self- determination era. all presidents should do the same. we call on the president to fully implement the united nations declaration on the rights of indigenous peoples. it specifically calls for a review of all existing federal law to ensure they are in alignment with the declaration. third, we called for an annual nation to nation summit, an ongoing high-level meeting to institutionalize the current tribal nations summit, a meaningful commission -- commitment to our relationship that must be upheld by all future presidents. we also call on the president to convene regular meetings on specific issues between tribal

leaders and cabinet secretaries. elevate native people in the federal government. it is past time for qualified native people to be seated on the federal bench. the appointment of a senior adviser on native american affairs as a dance policy-making at the white house. we applaud president obama for his leadership. the importance of the indian budget in the coming decade, we urge the creation of an office of native american programs at the office of management and budget. finally, we call for all candidates to actively engage indian country in your campaign. we invite each candidate to visit indian country to outline your policy decisions. we urge the campaigns to make sure tribal nations are part of the discussion at the presidential debate. [applause] between now and the election, we

have a lot of work to do. for all of the partisan challenges of the past year, congress has found common ground on indian policies. under the bipartisan leadership , the senate committee on indian affairs have reached across party lines to develop legislation that promises to transform indian country. in the house, republicans have worked hard to educate their constituents and colleagues about the benefits tribal governments offer our nation. there are important things congress can do right now to grow indian economies and create jobs. it can be done without spending a dime. congress can fix the problems created by the supreme court decision and offer certainty for transactions critical to indian country's economic future. [applause]

the department of the interior has acted to streamline these approvals for renewable energy development. we urge congress to pass the act to expand leasing reforms and pass an indian energy self- determination law. congress should act on public safety legislation that will attract businesses to our communities. we urge the passage of amendments to the stafford act, supported by fema, that would remove burdens from states and tribes in times of critical emergencies when lives are on the line. we call on the senate to pass the violence against women act reauthorization and the save native women act, both of which would take critical steps to address the horrific rates of violence being perpetrated

against our women. [applause] in a class act offers a chance to provide the -- the native class act offers a chance to provide the kind of opportunities our young people need for tomorrow. our young people must not be left behind anymore. [applause] congress must stand with us to get these bills passed. long-term success depends on american keeping her promises. that is why ncai and our partners are making available to you today our plan for the indian budget. this document outlines our vision for investing in the future of america and stabilizing the indian budget. it will create reliable, safe, domestic energy. it will build a 21st century

education system. it will modernize our infrastructure. it will fund implementation of critical legislation like the tribal law and order act and the indian health care improvement act. [applause] just as our plan holds hope for the future, the budget control act poses great risks. the act requires congress to cap discretionary spending for 10 years. much of the funding that fulfills the federal trust responsibility is categorized, wrongly in our view, as domestic discretionary spending. the trust responsibility is not a discretionary choice. it is not a line item. it is a solemn agreement sustained over hundreds of years. unless congress acts to hold tribal programs harmless, starting in 2013, we are facing

15% cuts across the board for the next decade. those cuts will threaten essential governmental services and affect millions of native citizens throughout vast regions of rural america. we're well aware of the budget challenges our nation faces. we live in indian country. we know all about doing more with less. we urge congress to stand up for the relatively small piece of the federal budget that belongs to tribal nations and our citizens. [applause] protecting the indian budget is the first step. long-term success depends on tribal nations having the same opportunities to protect and preserve our communities that are available to state and local government. we exercise jurisdiction over land that would make us the fourth largest state in this

country. we run dozens of programs previously administered by the federal agencies or states. we protect reservation environments in the manner states regulate off-reservation lands. tribal governments have proven they can grow the economy, educate our people, and manage our resources. we need the federal government to put decision-making power back in the hands of the people who live in indian country. [applause] they are the people who know best because these are our homelands. these are our people. the old way of doing business causes missed opportunities every day. the nation in washington state saw this firsthand. the tribe worked out a deal with walmart for a big, new store on the reservation. it was a great opportunity, a great deal.

$1 million a year in lease revenues for the tribe and new jobs for tribal members and people throughout the community. as with every lease on indian land, the federal government needed to approve it. the process to more than a year. by the time it was approved, economic conditions had changed. walmart had made other plans. $1 million for the people was gone. all the jobs are gone. this is not an isolated story. many tribal leaders can tell you stories today about business opportunities lost because of red tape. this is why our federal partners have already proposed crucial these reforms to free our economies. tribal nations have proven our capacity. we do not need government involved in all our business decisions. we need flexibility. by creating it, we will remove the barriers that cost us jobs

and opportunities. this is a goal we can all agree on across the political spectrum. it is something we can achieve with a change in policy and not an increase in spending. the solution washington is crying out for is something we in indian country are eager to answer the call for. flexibility it will yield more programs and spending. decisions will be made by those best in position to respond to community needs. it will relieve administrative burdens of the federal level. this message comes directly from tribal leaders. we went to them with one simple question. what can we do with what we have already, without asking for more resources, that will provide greater opportunities for indians, bring more impact for federal programs? the answer came back that we need freedom at the local level

to best use our limited resources. we know what is best because we live in indian country. we know where the needs are. we know what works for our people. no one understands indian life better than the indian nations themselves, the people live their daily. give us the flexibility. the standing rock sioux tribe in north dakota is delivering broadband services across their reservation because of governmental flexibility. the fcc decision to designate standing rock telecom as an eligible carrier means they are the first tribally owned and operated broadband company that can receive universal service funds. this designation has empowered standing rock to own and operate an essential communications infrastructure. this offers avenues for economic development, opportunities to preserve tribal languages and

cultures, and infrastructure for distance learning programs. that is the kind of flexibility we need in indian country with only one in 10 native people have access to broadband today. the reno sparks indian colony in nevada opened a 65,000 square foot health facility in 2007 that showed the promise of tax- exempt bond financing. almost $16 million in bonds funded a full-service clinic that serves 100,000 people each year. this project created permanent jobs and build the infrastructure for quality health services. tribes were denied full access to this source of financing until recovery act created a limited bond offering. based on that experience, the treasury released a report in december recommending governmental parity for tribal nations because it works. this will bring huge economic

benefits to tribes and surrounding regional economies. education is another example where flexibility can prepare our children for the global marketplace. the cherokee nation's lynch which -- language emergence school board a partnership with toppled to implement technology in the cherokee language. they developed cherokee language software for use on a macintosh computers, iphones, ipads. students chat on line in cherokee with students in north carolina. this is a powerful example of tribal innovation and initiative, the type of innovation that comes from greater authority over our own programs. [applause]

weather in economic development, education, health care, or energy, the key to getting it right is the freedom to identify and tear down the barriers to our success. tribal leaders carry with us a dream. it is a dream passed down from our parents and grandparents. it does not afford to 2012 or 2016. it looks to the -- it does not look forward to 2012 or 2016. we see a future where the relationship works for tribal nations and our federal partners. our ancestors knew the tribes could govern our nations and ourselves like no one else. today we have proven it. residents of rural oklahoma are driving to our health facilities because they offer the best services around. states and counties are turning to our traditional way of

managing natural resources. citizens of rural states are coming to the tribes for job opportunities and good education at tribal colleges. companies are coming to us to set up businesses on the reservation and bring american jobs home. we have the tools and freedom we need -- when we have the tools and freedom we need, we are creating business and leading the way. it is time to build our trust on the reality. [applause] that trust also requires consultation, legally enforceable consultation. without the power of legislation and accountability, informed consent are just nice words on paper. as president obama's said when he announced his support for the u.n. declaration, what matters

far more than words our actions to match the words. we call for action to make consultation law. enforceable consultation means we must talk about another idea, tribal consent. there will be public outcry if the federal government tried to impose policy on a state without its consent. but the concerns of tribal nations are routinely overlooked, even when more than one dozen tribes are larger than some northeastern states. this must not stand. [applause] our america is a place where all candidates know that we matter. it is a place where each and every president honors our unique nation to nation

relationship where indian country is always at the table, not just because it is a good idea and the right thing to do, but because it is the smart thing to do. our america is home to a congress that works across party lines to free our economies. our america is a place where governments keep their promises. our america is where tribal nations create economic opportunities and people come to us for the best jobs. it is a place where tribes are on the forefront of new technology, high-tech manufacturing, and clean energy. our america is where indigenous people reach across borders and bring home economic opportunities for all americans. as the oldest government in this country, tribal nations understand what is required to overcome stark economic conditions. perhaps more than any of their time in history, our nations

must stand together. we can make profound and permanent improvements in the lives of our people. carnations are committed to the success -- our nations are committed to the success of the united states of america. we will realize that success together so that our nation's survive -- thrive today and forever. thank you. [applause] >> thank you, president keel. now have the honor of introducing one of our champions from congress and a dear friend, congressman tom cole has

agreed to give us the congressional response. he is an enrolled member of the chickasaw nation. he has been serving on indian issues in congress since 2002. we hope he continues in the opposition for a long time to come. please help me welcome congressman tom cole [applause] >> thank you very much. it is an honor, privilege, and pleasure to follow my good friend and fellow chickasaw, lt. gov. jefferson keel. he gave you a thoughtful and eloquent address. i am here to prove to you that not all chickasaws are thoughtful and eloquent. [laughter] but it is my privilege to look across indian country.

i do so as a proud american and someone who is very proud of my state. i know most of you are proud of the states in which you decide, assuming you are american citizens. i also do that as a fellow native american and someone who is proud of my tribal traditions and pride. my forebears and family were members of the chickasaw nation and leaders before there was a united states of america. my great great grandfather was the clerk of the chickasaw supreme court before there was a territory of oklahoma. my great-grandfather was treasurer of the chickasaw nation before oklahoma was a state. we approach this as a very long and nuanced view of american history. that is not true for most

americans. they do not have the ability to draw from that tradition. most of the problems we face when we deal with other americans is largely because they're ignorant of those traditions and have not had the opportunity to be educated about it. they labor under misconceptions of who we are and what our status is in the larger political system. in washington today, from a native american perspective and an american and oklahoma perspective, it is the best and worst of times, to borrow a phrase from charles dickens. it is the best of times in many areas. in the house and senate, we have bipartisan cooperation on native american issues to an unprecedented degree. that is unusual. native american issues should not be approached in a partisan fashion. the reality is most of our interests span political

parties. some of them are irrelevant to the political dialogue and debate between republicans and democrats. what is in during is our federal trust relationship as individual indian nations with the federal government and whether or not the federal government carries out its responsibilities in a particular area. in the appropriations area where i specialize and spend a great deal of time, this has been a good year for us. i want to commend the administration. i am a conservative republican. obviously, i have some differences with the and administration. but each year the president has put forward a good budget for us to consider in the legislative process. on the house side, we have a real bipartisan alliance on interior appropriations where most indian funding takes place.

our subcommittee chairman is from idaho. our ranking member is from virginia. we have a wonderful partnership and working relationship. because of that and working honestly with the administration, we have made substantial progress. we have increased appropriations for the indian health service. the president is facing a difficult budget. he reduced the bia budgets slightly. we thought it was too much. restored some of the funding. if you look at the impact on things like housing across the board, while it did not see the same increases, it was essentially held harmless in the house. that is a good thing when we are experiencing difficulties in other areas. that bipartisan relationship has been powerful and good. you have also seen expressed in the establishment of the natural

resources committee for the first time in many years. in the house, a subcommittee on native american and alaskan affairs is something we have worked on for many years that finally came to fruition. that would not have happened if the republican chairman of the committee had not been supportive. he put in don young from alaska as the chairman. we have no better ally on native american issues than don young. is equally in that committed and knowledgeable. that has been a good thing. it has provided a vehicle where we have begun to get more attention focused and momentum for issues important in indian country. let me mention a few of those. i will always start out with my own legislation. [laughter] it is a trade bill.

we have a unique opportunity with turkey. they have a profound belief that the turkish are related to american indians. they want to partner for economic development. that bill has been heard in the subcommittee and is now waiting on floor action. we have h.r. 205, a democratic bill, very important in extending tribal authority in surface leasing areas. those would give individual tribal governments the kind of flexibility and authority that lt. gov. keel was talking about in his address. that is a bipartisan bill that awaits floor action. we also have h.r. 1599, and economic development built --an economic development bill. don young is working on a major

economic initiative. these are things that would give tribal governments the tools they need to control their own affairs and destiny. we have had hearings on the bills offered. highlight to say i would take either one of the bills. i would be delighted if his or mine passed. he is a wonderful partner and great friend. we will miss him when he leaves congress. we have a lot of things happening in the house of representatives. i do not pretend to speak authoritatively to the senate. we do not have two better advocates than the ones here. they work hard to focus attention in the senate. they worked hard on economic development issues and began to issue their colleagues on a bipartisan basis on the areas in which we can move together. we have a strong bicameral as well as bipartisan partnership

in native american affairs. i would be remiss not to mention the administration as well. many of the personnel are here. i see it secretary echohawk here. also, secretary salazar. they've shown sustained interest and commitment to the movement of important legislation and administrative decisions for indian country. the administration has put in place advisors at senior levels in cabinet positions so that members coming in to those positions have immediately available advice and counsel from those who understand indian country. the presidential initiative on native american nations summit is one of the hallmark contributions to

institutionalizing and strengthening the relationship between tribal governments. i could go on. the individual initiatives the administration has taken on. service leasing and renewable energy. bob would like to get some sub- surface flexibility -- i would like to get some sub-surface flexibility. we will work on that. this was a step in the right direction on the part of the administration. there are lots of good things happening. the good things that happen are almost always in terribly partisan things where we have found common ground and can work together for the good of indian country. on the other hand when i say it is the worst of times, there are some challenges. we need to have more bipartisanship between the two bodies. a house out to the senate in terms of its commitment to the funding of indian programs. when we got into the process of

negotiation, the house wanted to native americana concerns. on the senate side, it was other priorities. they are not against what we're trying to do. they have additional priorities. i would argue there should be few if any priorities higher than the trust relationship that the united states has with individual indian nations. [applause] need to expand the bipartisan and bicameral cooperation. we need to build on the good works of our senators and have a partnership where we move together where democrats and republicans can go into indian country with a great deal to be proud of instead of a great deal to apologize for. but let's be real. if we wait on the federal government to take care of our

problems, we will be waiting for a very long time. indians and all people ought to know self-alliance, self- progress, self-determination are the real routes to moving forward. the government's job is to keep its commitments, honor its trust responsibilities, and work with us to remove the obstacles placed in front of tribal development. that is something where we have a long way to go. the scope of the challenge is historic. it is monumental. most americans do not realize it. i could quote statistics we all know on education, life span, health, opportunities to move forward. first americans are still the

last americans. that needs to change. it is a national disgrace and challenge. it will take a national effort to move us in the right direction. i think the challenge for this particular organization is to educate the rest of america about the challenges we face in indian country. i am proud of what this organization has done throughout its existence. it has a long and honorable history of doing just that. the scope of the challenge is amazing. this summer, i have the honor of traveling with secretary echohawk, congressman simpson, and others. we went to chickasaw and talk talk country in oklahoma. -- choctaw country in oklahoma. we have had challenges.

this is not my historic homeland. my forebears did not come there by choice. but they used the tools and opportunities they had. they have had hardships but overcame them in many ways. we have thriving travel economies -- tribal economies that are doing well. then we went to see our friends on the reservations in north and south dakota. there also resilience, innovative, a book. but there challenges are great. -- but there challenges are greater. they should go -- americans should go to pine ridge, standing right. they should see some of the challenges their fellow americans are facing. i am sure if they saw them and understood them, they would work with us to overcome them. that will be our great challenge going forward. we have a very different perspective on american history. i want to end with a couple of

stories to drive that home. my great amount is a famous storyteller and artist of world renown. she told the stories of a lot of tribes. she used to pick up anecdotes and try to draw the moral out of them that an indian would drop out of them. i remember one. is one of my favorites. it is based on a real incident of the southern cheyenne were chief in negotiations with the american government in the 1800's. trying to encapsulate in words the enormity of the challenge and change he was seeing in the course of his lifetime. in the course of the treaty negotiations, he addressed the representatives of the united states government. he was an american but not an american citizen, obviously. he said, once this was all the

land of the red man. then came the white man, the black man, and the yellow man. i have thought about this. i have thought about nature. in nature, there are white horses, what courses, red horses, horses of many colors. there are redbirds, bought birds, white birds. all one bird, all one horse, all one man. degrees. must have wanted this to become the land of all peoples -- the great spirit most of wanted this to become the land of all peoples for evermore. it is a way to encapsulate how we are as a people and american nation. that is where he concluded his story. my great aunt added that if you really know indians, you know that sometimes what they do not

say is more important than what they do say. when he gave that eloquent speech in the recognized the change reality of the world in which he lived, he did not say he would give up who he was or who his tribe was, his languages or traditions. he intended to keep those within the greater whole he was becoming part of. that is who we are. we're the oldest part of america, the most remarkable part of america, actually the most diverse part of america. each and every person in here who is a member of a tribe intends to remain who you are and retain and pass on that identity, your culture, your traditions, in your unique political status within the constitution of the united states. each generation of american indians usually has to educate the rest of the country about

what the status is, who we are, and who we intend to be. a navajo brother -- they have a phrase that they use, the long walk, some of the tragedies they went through as a people. when we think about along what, it is different from a lot of the traditions -- when we think about the long walk, it is different lot of the other traditions. along what is a team of-way -- the long walk was two way. it was a long walk back home. we are engaged in a long walk. much of it is a walk away from who we were. sometimes forced relocation, forced assimilation, forced

efforts to literally eliminate tribal governments altogether. we are now at a turning point. we are in the long walk back home, to retaining our sovereignty, retaining our identity, and retaining and celebrating the unique contribution each and every indian nation makes to this wonderful nation we all called the united states of america. thank you very much. [applause] >> now you all know why we are so proud of our enrolled chickasaw member of congress and his profound words he shared with us today. we're also honored to be joined by two other members of congress who give us a good

example of the bipartisan effort to come together. i want to introduce and recognize the chairman of the senate committee on indian affairs. he is a native hawaiian. his purpose. cultural protection, the importance of some of the values of our language program, and the hope and opportunities to come forward as part of his championship in the senate committee. he is joined by the senator from wyoming who is championing the energy bill and moving it forward. we think that will be another great economic opportunity for indian country. we would be glad to have you both come up. together, standing together like you do in the committee. [applause]

>> thank you so much. i will stand behind you. >> aloha. it is a pleasure to be with you today and hear and see president keel's assessment of the state of the indian nations and outline our tribal priorities for the coming year. it is important for all native american communities where they are native american, alaska, or native hawaiian, to take stock

of where they are and set achievable goals for the coming year. in this time when all governments are having to do more with less, we must endeavor to strengthen the ability of tribal governments to develop their local economies, to spur job creation, and meet the needs of their people. as chairman of the senate committee on indian affairs, i am committed to remind my colleagues about our trust responsibility and the promises made to tribal nations. working to protect the federal programs and services mandatory to meeting that responsibility.

the vice chairman and i continue to lead the committee in a bipartisan manner, resolve ambiguity in federal law regarding the rights of native communities, and the jurisdiction of their governments. we look to dance -- advance native solutions to native concerns. the committee has held nenumeros committees and sessions because i believe in hearing from the stakeholders as we do important work impacting indian country. native communities are innovative in their approaches to self-sufficiency, particularly in energy, economic development, and education.

they are demonstrating the capacity to meet the needs of the communities. we must remove barriers to their work. in keeping with the federal policy of self-determination and self-governance, the committee will continue to build on issues vital to native peoples. the unique identities and the importance of their homelands. we will work with you to build the foundation for a new era in the government to government relationship. you also have a strong partner in the obama administration and in assistant secretary larry echohawk.

we have had good cooperation with them and relationships, and also with secretary salazar as well. as many of you know, mike two top priorities -- my two top priorities are vital to ensuring parity in federal law and resolving ambiguities in america's relationship with its first peoples. the bill clarifies the secretary of the interior's ability to take lands and to trust -- into trust for all tribes. it is an authority the secretary has exercised for more than 75 years. it has created instability in

native and rural communities across the country. the legislative fix creates over 100,000 jobs for american workers and significantly improves law enforcement on and near reservations. we are seeing new legal challenges to the status of indian lands. these kinds of lawsuits cost money. that is better spent meeting the needs of native peoples. this issue has bipartisan and bicameral support. i applaud my good friend, called for his leadership on this issue. -- i applaud my good friend tom cole for his leadership on this

issue. the overthrow of the king of what he to private -- deprived alliance of their native government. shortly after, we began addressing native hawaiian traditions and have done so and over 150 laws -- in over 150 laws. 100 years later, an apology to the native people from the united states role in the overthrow the kingdom and the suppression of their rights to self-determination was enacted. . .

my career is proof that being who we are as native peoples is

effective in washington, d.c. [applause] i do encourage tribal nations to participate in the process. meet with my committee staff to share your concerns and solutions. and continue to move forward together. we are part of a great nation. and we must continue to keep it great. and by coming together and working together, we can bring it about. i look forward to working with you all on your priorities. i want to thank you for giving me this opportunity to make

these remarks. god bless you. god bless your families. god bless the indians and nci and the alaskans and god bless the united states of america. [applause] >> i wanted to stand here today with our chairman to show how we want to continue to work together in a bipartisan way. and we will continue to do that on behalf of the indian people. thank you, mr. chairman. [applause] i wanted to be here to express

to president keel my appreciation, my admiration, and my respect. i am so grateful to be here with you. and representative coal's statement is absolutely right. flexibility and authority. and i want to thank you for sharing those wonderful stories of the history of your family as well as your great aunt's story. those are lessons that we should and can never forget. they are critical to all of us. i listened very closely to the remarks, and to me it all comes down to, what's the headline of this? it's tear down barriers to success. and you continue to face those barriers to success. it's remove the obkls as you have said. and that's what we continue to do as we work to remove the obstacles that stand in the way of economic success, of jobs,

of health care, of education, and a better way of life. so i just wanted to be here to share with my chairman and with representative cole all of our concerns as well as our good wishes. so thank you very much for letting me be with you today. [applause] >> thank you again to our members of congress for joining us today. we know you have busy schedules but we are honored by your presence. at this time we would like to open up for questions. we will start by opening up for questions to our press and we will go to opening it up to questions of other folks. we do have people on line. we have over 500 sites watching live right now as well as the taping that will happen on c-span's taping and others are taping as well as the radio stations so we will be taking questions on line via the ipad.

at this point, any questions from press first in could you please state who you are and who you represent. and we do have microphones. thank you. [inaudible] -- gives tribes and especially some of these bills that have lingrd in the senate. do you think that kind of opens the door for some of these bills because there is such bipartisan agreement on them to become top priorities for this congress? >> i certainly hope so. i think ooze you mentioned the partisan gridlock, i think that the partisan gridlock is not because of the bills that affect indian people. as we said earlier, congress has found common ground on those issues that affect indian country. on indian policy, i think that you see across both ilse

support for those programs. i don't know what the outcome will be in some of these bills getting them passed, but certainly we are encouraged by the bipartisan support for all of those bills and we thank you for that question. >> good morning. i'm with the native news network. yesterday, the u.s. census bureau released this figure. 78% of american indians live off or away from tribal lands. what can be done to make sure our indians who are living in urban settings and rural settings can get the benefit -- because so much of the money goes directly to tribes? >> that's an interesting question. and thank you for that. we do realize that the urban indian population is a populations of indian people in the urban areas are growing. it's growing. many of our people have left

and moving to urban areas because of the a lack of job opportunities, the lack of programs, and lack of access to those opportunities in and around our local communities. but the tribal governments themselves are looking at opportunities to assist those tribal members. it is very difficult at times, particularly in those areas where the dollars are limited and because federal dollars are appropriated and are utilized by those that are benefited within that local community. and so i know that ncais and some of our partner organizations have looked at how we can help those people in those urban areas. and particularly in the health care arena, we have some urban health care centers that provide health care and access to health care for those who reside in those areas. but those are limited. we don't have those in all of the areas that we need. we simply have a few, a handful

of those health care centers. we need more. but it is a very difficult question and one that we continue to work on. jackie? >> i want to add one thing. first, yesterday was a great day when they released that report at the native american museum and we were pleased to have some of our staff also be part of that. but look at the map in the press release and the report. if you look at the map, the concentration of natives is actually really close and adjacent to native communities. so even though we do have a large spread of what we would call urban indians, there's the highest concentrations are really adjacent to the tribal communities. next question. any other press with questions? >> yes. >> i was just wondering how the the president's state of the

union obviously the other day he did mention the 24,000 native americans in the armed forces however he failed to mention much more about the native american communities. what is your response to that? because as you said you are the first americans. >> thank you. obviously we would like a lot more exposure, we would like a lot more comments from the president about the native communities and the policies that affect our citizens. i think the state of the nation addressed by the president was directed more to congress. i think his priorities was looking further and was more broad in the context of the nation as whole and not necessarily focused on native america. a few months ago, a month or so ago there were tribal leaders at the tribal nation summit held here in washington, d.c. in december. tribal leaders -- 12 tribal

leaders were able to sit down and meet with the president one on one on one afternoon, and many of those tribal leaders, in fact all that were there -- i happened to be honors to be pard of that. we did direct questions to the president and we asked him for specific areas of support. obviously the time was limited. we do expect in the future we ask for additional meetings with the president not just a one-time meeting once a year, but these meetings with the cabinet secretaries those are the people who really affect the indian programs and the services that are provided to native americans. but we ask for that and we ask for support, we ask for meetings with the office of management and budget and other high-level agencies. that is where really we need to

be concentrating. so we would love to hear the president address and talk about native americans, but it's up to tribal leaders to continue to ask for access to the white house and access to him. i have to say the president -- this president, president obama, he made some commitments to indian country during his campaign when he was returning for president. he has kept his word. he has placed people in strategic important positions within his administration and they are doing a tremendous job. but it is limited. again, access is limited. and we need to expand that. we need broader support. >> can i add one more thing? in the president's message, a lot he talked about was trying to address the economic security of this country but about program flexibility. if you heard president keel's speech today we're asking for the same thing that the president was speaking about in

his address two days ago and west developed a report that we have shared with the white house, we have had meetings with the white house to talk about those specific areas of program flexibility. so we are hoping that we will part of the work that they are doing within the administration targeting those area where without a lot of new money but with a little bit more government flexibility our programs will be more efficient. >> also in yesterday's release of the census figures, a very high percentage of american indians are under the age of 24. what would be your suggestions to all of indian country on how we can mobilize the indian vote for the age brackets between 18 and 24? >> well, i'm going to ask jackie to talk about the native vote, get out the native vote. because we do have a

concentrated effort to get out the native vote this coming year. it is important that we mobilize our young people not just the first-time voters. but that is an important segment. but all of our native citizens in all of our communities, to get out, get registered, and vote. when we look at how many were not even registered four years ago in the presidential election, almost 1 million people were not redgestrd to vote. that is a significant piece of leverage to use in these native elections. so it is important that we not only talk about getting out the native vote but we concentrate our efforts in how to do that. i know jackie's worked extremely hard and her staff and our sister agencies and partners in indian country have worked hard to do that. so i'm going to ask her to address what we're doing specifically, particularly these large indian population areas. >> we have a plan.

go to native vote.org and you'll see our plan. we have a campaign for the year not just targeting our tribal leaders. we've asked every tribe to have a native vote coordinator. we have monthly trainings and teleconferences with those coordinators wlrks it be for the tribe, the state, the region. we've met with all the native nonprofits on monday and talked to them about what they can do and can't do regarding supporting our native vote efforts. we met with the regional tribal associations last friday and talked to them about what we can do as far as training in their communities. we have partnered with rock the vote and other areas to build within their civic curriculum. we will have a native curriculum will supplement there for schools with high populations of native students. and we have a whole native youth vote campaign that's going on in addition just to the regular. native vote.org. you'll learn about it.

thanks. >> i want to add one area and that is i wanted to thank the members of congress that have come here today. i want to thank congressman cole for his remarks, senator akaka, senator brasso. i know that their time is critical. but when we talk about people who support indian issues, who are supportive, not just because they're required to, not just because they have constituents within their legislative districts but because they understand what it really means. that's what we need in indian. country. we need the native vote to get out and talk to those candidates. find out who and what they are, where they come from. do they support our programs? and if they do, let's support them. let's help them. that's what we need to do in the native vote. but it's more than just talking about it. we need to organize and mobilize them. thank you. i got busy there.

we had another question. >> i'm going to take a question from one of the reporters on line. this is from mark from true han reports question for president keel. can this bipartisan coop be used to treat entitlement programs? >> i think he's referring to maybe this bipartisan cooperation? that would be great. i would love to see that. i think that indian country would love to see this entitlement as a 51st state. there's been a lot of talk about that in the past and we've talked about, particularly at centers for -- cms. i know they've talked about some of these regulations and how we can expand those. and i know the doctor is here leading efforts in the indian health service at hfs to get

indian people and indian programs involved and how we can expand the services to all native americans. i want to thank her for that support and that help. that's a great topic for us to discuss. it's something we need to continue on. thank you for that question. i know i didn't answer it but i thank you for question. >> mary jane with the national education association's office of minority community outreach. i want to commend you for bridging the digital divide and bringing this forum into indian country and specifically into the classrooms that are educating our children. are we going to have any kind of a pulse on how many of our native youth across the country had access and opportunity to participate? and as a followup, maybe a challenge for you to engage our native youth through like a twitter hall or something, because i really want to know what our native youth feedback

from this phenomenal event is. >> yes, we did. we did extensive outreach and i will tell you we have a tweet here from a youth who wants to know, i think this is her name, terminator bar by. so maybe i shouldn't say that. but how do we connect to our youth to the -- how do we connect our youth to the leaders who spoke during the national congress american indians and do we have a mentor program? so i will just -- yes. so yes we do have a mentor program. we have fellows and interns that come to ncai. a good share of our staff and we also have a youth commission. we have a number of youth partners that we work -- collaborate together with, including niea and we developed a youth jeapeda. so we have a youth web page on

our website. we can connect to youth in ways we have great agenda for this year. one last question here. can i have a question from the audience here. yes. >> you speak of the bipartisan approach that's taken sometimes in congress on different pieces of legislation. but that doesn't always translate into success. can you identify two pieces of legislation that you believe must be passed by the upcoming session of congress before it can be viewed as a success by the indian country? >> i think the most pressing need that we have is the criteria fix. the legislation, that's been the priority for indian country for the past several years. and it has been -- it almost was passed last year. we almost got there. it ran into a hold i believe.

but that is the number one priority. the other would be, as we mentioned earlier, the violence against our women act reauthorization, and the save native women act. all of those have bipartisan support. but number one would be the criteria fix. we absolutely need that fixed today. thank you. >> thank you. >> ok. >> and i apologize we ran out of time for questions. but everyone who sent us an electronic question on line we will be answering those questions to you. if you have other questions we would be glad to answer them. you can get ahold of our press office and those questions will be forwarded on to us. thank you for listening and being part of our annual state of the indian nations address. and on behalf of the national congress of american indians i would like to thank c-span, native voice one, and the tribal public and road stations across the nation and all the

online viewers for realizing the importance and covering this event today. thank you. [applause]

>> april 15, 2010 i had arrived in paris, walked into the hotel lobby, met general mcchrystal for the first time. he looked at me and said, so you're the rolling stone guy. i don't care about the article. i just want to be on the cover. >> michael hastings wrote about the commander in the june 2010 issue of rolling stone. >> i said well, sir, i think it's between you and lady gaga. i was just trying to make some joke not knowing lady gaga was going to be on the cover. he replied just put us in a heart-shaped tub. and i thought, this is a different kind of general. this is going to be a different kind of story. >> several months later, general mcchrystal had been fired. michael hastings continues the story and talks about his new

book. >> it would be intolerable in f a handful of violent people could hardin us against needed change. i have seen an uglyor violence, too, and it per verts the spirit of america. i saw at the republican convention when governor rock feller, i saw it in minneapolis when governor wallace, a man with whom i disagree, was heckled into silence and it happened to me in philadelphia. we must give notice to this violent few. there are millions of decent americans who are willing to sacrifice for change but they want to do it without being threatened and they want to do it peacefully. they are the nonviolent majority. black and white. who are for change without violence. these are the people whose voice i want to be. >> as candidates campaign for president this year, we look back at 14 men who ran for the office and lost. go to our web site to see video

of the contenders who had a last combg pact on american polls ticks. >> our ancestors came across the ocean in sailing ships you wouldn't go across the lake in. when they arrived there was nothing here. they built their tidy little cabance and they did it with neighbors helping one another, not federal grants. they came here because they wanted to be free. and they wanted to practice the relincolnen of their choice. and after 200 years too many of us take those privileges for granted. >> next, information sharing in the intelligence community with the director of national intelligence james clapper. he told a group that secure and credible information sharing is a beneficial tool for those working in national security. an information sharing environment was established in

2004 by the intelligence reform and terrorism prevention act to help u.s. agencies share terrorism related information. this is about 45 minutes. we're delighted you are here. thank you very much. this is going to be a very interesting session. i'm going to turn to dan to formally introduce things in a second. i did want to say a word of thanks to my friend general clapper. i had nothing to do with inviting him, so then i feel completely liberated to say what i really think about him, which is he is one of my real

heroes. this is a man who has dedicated his life to something much bigger than himself, and that's serving this country. he's done a spectacular job in virtually every position that government has in the area of intelligence and national security. the only thing that he failed at honestly was trying to be a civilian for a brief period of time. he never liked that very much. and when called to come back into service, after a very distinguished military -- called back to come into service, went to n.g.a., traps formed it, gave it the most complicated name in history, but then that led of course to him being pulled in to the defense department as the undersecretary for intelligence. and then that of course led to his current role as the director of national intelligence where he is doing

a spectacular job at a really tough time. i mean, we've had ever since the dni was established, it has been an era of additional resources and now we have this pivot point. that's become the new favorite washington word. we're pivoting here. to an eradio where there is going to be some austerity. and fortunately general clapper has such a broad base and a depth of skill and understanding this community that he knows how to guide it through this perilous time. and i think he is doing a terrific job. now, this is a very awkward time for general clapper to be becoming because the budget is not formally released so i'm just going to give him permission up front to refuse to answer some of your questions if he decides to. he can, as has always been the case, put at risk his own career. but i'm not willing to do it for him. so i will give him permission

to say i can't answer that because the president's budget is not out. it will be up to him to decide what he wants to do. but a very famous american once said he wanted to judge people by the content of their character, not the color of their skin. i know the content of this man's character and we're lucky to have him in service. dan, let me ask you to come up and get this started. i want to thank our friends at ibm giving us the opportunity to bring this public forum to the audience today. we're glad you are all here. dan, why don't i turn to you. >> thank you for hosting us today. i'm vice president and practice lead for public sector strategy and innovation consulting at ibm. we're pleased to be the partner for this important conference in this series, which has going around. today clsfrens again is an important step to continue this dialogue. the conference focused on information sharing, adapting ex proving and expanding

information sharing environment. in the years since established by the intelligence reform and terrorism prevention act of 2004, we have come a long way in terms of predicting and preventing incidents, not simply responding after the fact. and we have done it by better sharing information, analyzing, and preventing incidents in real time. today's program aligns with the tofertse strengthen information sharing and improve global security. many members of the ibm team are going to be participating in events throughout the course of the day and we appreciate the opportunity to engage in these discussions. >> now, it is my honor to tell you a little more than what dr. hamry did about our key note speaker today. director of national intelligence jame clapper. he was sworn in as the 4th dni in august of 2010. he leads the united states intelligence community and serves as the principal intelligence advisor to the president. he has a long distinguished

career in the armed forces culminating as a lieutenant general in the u.s. air force and director of the intelligence age sifment over 32 years in uniformed service he also helped held positions during operations zerd desert shield and desert storm and three warfighting commands. of note, he also served two combat tours during southeast asia conflict and flew missions over lewis and cambodia. he worked in industry as an executive with business focus on the intelligence community. he served as a consultant and advisor to congress, the department of defense and energy and as a member of a wide variety of government panels boards commissions and groups. he was a member of the task force that investigated the covar towers bombings and was

vice chairman of commission on the subject of homeland. he returned to government in 2001 as the first civilian director of the national imagery and mapping agency. he served as director for five years transforming that organization. he then served for over 3 years in two administrations as the undersecretary of defense for intelligence where he served as staff assistant to the secretary and deputy secretary on intelligence, counter intelligence and security matters for the department. he was also dual-hatted for the dni. he earned his bachelor's degree in government and politics from the university of maryland, a master's degree from political science and an honorary doctorate in strategic intelligence from the then joint military intelligence college. he has won numerous award. two defense distinguished service medals, the air force,

the coast guard, the department of defense and a host of other awards and decorations. he was named as one of the top 100 it executives by federal computer week and singled out in the form of its national distinguished service award and has been awarded the presidently conferred national security medal. i had the honor of meeting him in 2007 when we served on a council on foreign relations task force and i had the honor working with the intelligence and national security alliance supporting director clapor's thinking around civil liberties and keeping the country safe. in both of those experiences i know his commitment to keep the country safe, information sharing and to civil liberties. with that, i would like to introduce director clapper and we look forward to a good day. [applause] >> it would be nice if i just

quit while i was ahead here. i appreciate the very generous and very kind introduction. i certainly appreciate csis for this opportunity to kick off i think a very important dialogue . obviously, i don't need to tell this crowd information sharing has been a huge mandate for us all since 9/11. the notion of sharing is an interesting concept. it can be phenomenal, it can be dangerous. it depends on what is shared and with whom it is shared. there is an old eastern saying that thousands of candles can be lighted from a single candle and the candle will not be shortened. happiness never decreases by being shared. now, that is a little too warm and fuzzy for you, we also found some words written by a

noted harvard professor. collecting data is only the first step towards wisdom but sharing data is the first step towards community. that applies in spades just within the intelligence community. at the same time, of course we as you know have the dilemma of protecting information and so there is this threma that we all wrestle with, particularly those in this group, in how you balance the two. so we are here today of course to talk about the sharing of information and so we might define that as a national responsibility to ensure that any person with appropriate mission need can discover and access actionable information at the right time. to successfully prevent harm to the american people and at the

same time protect our national security. so we believe, i sermon do, that sharing must be done responsibly, seamlessly and securely. with regards to with safeguards in place to protect the privacy, civil rights and civil liberties of the american people as well as to prevent unauthorized disclosure. in short, the right data any time any place useable by any authorized recipient prevent obble only by law protect bid a comprehensive redgeym of accountability. that's our vision or in a nutshell sharing and safe gaurting all information exquiz hitly perfectly. that is the nir vanna of information sharing. one we may not always achieve. but that's certainly the goal.

and it's, as we all know, particularly in the last ten years, it is not an easy task. information sharing goes far beyond the intelligence community. where i work, and it can get a little bit confusing. so i wanted to by way of explaining who some of the other speakers are, kind of explain these relationships, at least as i see them. so later this morning you will be hearing from six other people from my office, the office of director of national intelligence. so the panel first will -- first panel will be on it will be the what's called the program manager for the information sharing environment. although he is tethered to the dni, he really is the national lead for all information government information sharing. and in that context reports

directly to the white house. so he cuts across the entire fabric of the u.s. government straddling the other do mains besides the intelligence, which means law enforcement, public safety, homeland security, and foreign affairs. so he has a broader mission including synergizing and aligning these fields with the white house. so intel, sort of my do main, is just one area that he touches and influences. i would also like to recognize david now the deputy director of the defense intelligence agency on that first panel. david is an old dni plank holder, there at the beginning of 2005. on the second panel which deals with the culture of information sharing is attorney stone. she is the lead on my staff for information sharing within the

ic, a position that i established when i came on in this job. so devoted to this topic, she came off maternity leave just to be here. so this is her idea of fun. get a baby sitter and come to a conference sponsored by csis. so good on. she will be talking to you about how to change a culture to increase information sharing, which is of course one of the challenges we have in the intelligence community. and the way we're doing this somewhat accelerated i suppose by wikileaks, is increasing the confidence that the information is secure. there are often times, although probably a mischaracterization, that somehow there is a zero

sum relationship between the need to know and the need to protect. how do we increase both. so in the ic, coren makes sure we have the policies procedures and technology all in place to share information, protect the information, and safeguard civil licts and privacy. and as sort of those three pillars of those factors that we have to reconcile and synchronize. the third panel today is on eofficialsy, scope, and privacy, han on it, mike, the deputy and wess wilson counter terrorism center, another new feature of the intelligence land scape that was part of the intelligence reform and terrorism prevention act. nctc also housed in the old dni

with again a special relationship with the ppt. the fourth and last panel has my privacy officer alex joel and i think there's a message just in the fact that again by law on the odni staff is a full time civil liberties and privacy officer who, alex i think is a national asset, is a very, very trusted adviser on many of our most sensitive and important issues. and he will be with other whose focus on how we advance policy and legal operational framework. so just all to say, we heavy represented and committed to this conference because of the importance on the subjects. so let me just tux on a few points and then all answer dangerous type questions.

one of the things that is sort of a new thing for me in this job is of course engaging in the domestic arena, particularly with the law enforcement community. i've had occasion to engage quite a bit with them as a matter of fact, particularly through the auspices of the international association of chiefs of plees and many of their subordinate task forces and organizations. and was alluded to, i'm retired military and -- but i've come to have great respect for what the law enforcement community does to protect our security in this country as well. i found them to be a gold mine of wisdom and insight when it comes to what i call street intelligence. like the military and the intelligence community overseas, they too put their lives on the line. but here at home. many years ago, i remember i

was president of the community association i lived in, something i will never do again, and had set up one of the first neighborhood watch programs in fairfax county, way back in the 1970s. and in the practice of doing that, i had the opportunity to do some ride alongs with fairfax county police and later on virginia state police. and it's quite an education to sit inside a police cruiser looking out and see how, what our police and law enforcement officials deal with day in and day out. when you pull somebody over, you have no idea and of course the scariest call that law enforcement officials don't like to get and they always go in pairs is domestic disturbance. it was a great appreciation, a great sensitivity training, if you will, for me on having that experience and knowing what our law enforcement people do day

in and day out. i think bring information sharing initiatives that he is working with with law enforcement. so let me just briefly address six key points about the sharing of intelligence. the first of course is integration, which you may have heard is kind of my emphasis, my mantra in this job is focusing on intelligent integration. absolutely missioncal for the intelligence community. our ultimate goal is simply a nation made more secure because of a fully ingrated intelligence community. for all of the u.s. government, threats require us to accelerate responsible information sharing. secondly, doing this requires

some standardization. and we're pursuing some efficiencies as all of o us are in our business. i met yesterday with our five vice colleagues and one of them offered up the term that has become popular in his country, australia, they call it the efficiency dividend. which he said is an orwellion you'vimism for can you tell us. -- cuts. we're doing that as well. one of the things and the big idea department somewhat influenced by budget pressure cuts is for the first time ever an integrated it ernt prize across the major intelligence agencies across the country. this is something we talked about for years. just never were compelled to do

it now we are. always loved the line of the fizzsist in 1927 in dealing with the new zealand budget crisis, and it's a paraphrase. we're running out of money so we must begin to think. we're kind of in that mode now. one of those is clout computing which i think has a huge potential for achieving savings and promoting education. and attendant to that will be the rerk sit for security as well. but like it and generalists is not a panacea. >> the first is protecting privacy sivet rights and liberties is paramount. i again in this job have become particularly sensitive to this issue and thgs a big deal in this country as it must be.

i think there is a maturity and sofffigsication in today's intelligence community about this that i think regrettably the public doesn't appreciate or see. but protecting the rights of americans is core to our information sharing erts. and this too requires enterwise pride approach. fourth, sharing and safe guarding information must be done in tandem. i guess this would be the opportunity to bring up wikileaks, which of course has been a terrible event for us and that has caused us to make some changes in our community in terms of auditting, monitoring, controlling moveable media. and we have to do more to both tag data and ensure that we can

properly identify people so that if we are sharing information we are assured that they have the bonea fidies and they are actually authorized to receive the information. it's sort of counter intutive but by having greater identity management and greater an improved labeling tagging and moving along that data that ensures security and it also enhances sharing. if you can be sure that the information that you are sharing is actually going to an authorized recipient, that actually is an inducement to do more sharing. now, we will of course as we always do, and install the mouse traps to prevent what are the recurrence of wicki leaks.

but in the end our system is based on personal trust. we've had them before and we'll probably have them again. the president signed an executive order in october. executive order 13587 which was designed to improve the security of classified networks and promote sharing of information. and has set up some bodies to make sure that happens so that we bring together polls of sharing and security. so as a part of this, we need to build a more pervasive auditting and monitoring capabilities and we have varying degrees of capability

right now in the intelligence community. so we're going to do some investing to bring that into balance. we need to develop a national insider threat policy. as i said, establish the bona fidees with sharers. the goal of course as i said is to find that nir vanna, that sweet spot between the responsibility share and the need to protect. the fifth key point, and this is something we're working hard at, is embracing common operating models and shared services. so we need -- and what that applies for me is greater integration horizontally as well as vertically from federal, state, local, tribal and private sector. and our allies as well.

the program manager for the information sharing environment is helping to transform justice and public safety into information getting them into the information sharing business model. working to promote common operating models and shared services. the siftsdz and final point is of course in all this the challenges aren't technical as much as they are just ensuring right policies and governance. we in the intelligence community have developed and coordinated a strategic plan for managing ic information sharing activities and working together with us has also established a governmentwide meck nix for managing and oversees compliance and safe guarding standards among our mission partners. so with that, i think i will stop and will be happy to take

some questions. >> i want to thank you for that. we really appreciate the remarks and taking time out of your schedule to address this. my name is rick, director of the hosmedse and counter terrorism program. i want to clarify one thing my boss gave me to moderate the question and answer session. those of you that know me, i run a tight ship. the first thing i want to clarify is this is the information sharing conference. this is not the president's budget conference. this is the information sharing conference. so i would ask you not to put me on the spot. i also am going to use my progress trive to ask the first question and tap into some of director clapper's

extraordinary experience in this field. particularly the culture, how have you seen the community -- and not just the intelligence community -- but the u.s. government embrace information sharing over the particularly last ten years? some has been forced by legislation. some, what has been the biggest factor and do you think it's got enough tracktion now where it's self-sustaining? >> first ask ask away and -- i just won't answer. that's all. obviously the biggest event which was an epipni for all of us was 9/11. having been around the intelligence community a long time, i think event and what ensued after it was a signal thing for us, certainly in the intelligence community and i think the larger government.

classically, historically, it was a fire wall that having grown up in the intelligence business, between foreign and domestic. i was a young pup in the 70s and watched church pipe hearings which were addressed a lot of the abuses, frankly, that went on under the mantra of foreign nnls. but it was done illegally, really, in the united states. may be well-intended but bad for the country. that led to the first version of the executive order 123 p 3 which laid out and reaffirmed that firewall. all that came to a halt dramatic halt with 9/11. and so that is what has caused us to -- that's what gave rise

to the intelligence reform terrorism prevention act which mandated -- set up the dn imp, some other things and the need, recognize the need legislatively for information sharing. so now that firewall is gone. it's not to say it's completely eradicated culturally, i'll say, but i think we've made a lot of strides and i think there are more and more is a recognition of the need to share responsibly and securely but protect civil liberties. and in answer to your question, will it stick? is there enough momentum and enough tracktion? absolutely. i don't think there's any question about that. that said, because of the

history where we have been doing the foreign intelligence a lot longer than our engagement into the domestic arena which is not as mature, there are still sort of disparities there which i think oobling crew largely from history. but from what i have seen and several capacities the three jobs i've had in the last ten years i think we've made great strides. that's not to say there's not more to do. >> thank you for that. we do have questions. we have microphones going around. please state your name and your affiliation if you have one, please. we'll start in the front right here. >> dave, ayation week. what's your best assessment of unintended information sharing the effect on military programs in particular the f-35 program

which was successfully hacked and is it your belief that that breach of information resulted in new costs and program stretchouts

those who need to have access to it can do it more quickly and efficiently than we are able to do it now. what i hope will ensue is a transformation of our i.t. enterprise in the intelligence community. that serves to enhance security.

if you know the data, you can .ccount for it you are in a better posture from a security and sharing standpoint. our plan is over the next five years to have made some serious and noticeable changes. >> we will go to the gentleman in a blue shirt. >> there has been a lot of discussion about the continuing size of the [inaudible]

by the white house study group. is the role going to change substantially? >> going back to before anyone heard of it, when i first took over in 2001, i became a big believer in commercial in the street -- imagery. it is great for sharing with coalitions overseas and domestically. i think there's always going to be a substantial need for commercial intrigue -- imagery. we will have that done in the next few months.

we will look at the applicability of commercial imagery. that is not to say in this era t isudget-cutting that i not to be considered in that situation as well. >> i am formally with the -- formerly with the cia. despite the reputation my former organization has of being troglodytes, i am not and do not think most knowledgeable people are. we do not spend hours in the statehouse in baghdad with a source wanting to keep it all to yourself. you have it right. you have a right with the responsibility to share and the need to protect. when you get into the terms of

the recipient information and authorities, i think there is confusion about what that means. it is and in direct contrast to the need to know. for a while, that was a bad term. there is a need to know in everything we do. there is a difference between the notion of need to know and information sharing. >> within the context of the intelligence community, there is the need to protect sources and methods at the same time, there is the dilemma between protecting sources and methods,

the information gleaned, and how it is used. if you are able to label data based on the sources and methods rather than the source -- than the information, you can determine routinely and systematically so that it is not a big deal. you can establish quickly communities of interest based on a given need. if you have the data labeled and know the people that need to have access to the data, you can do it on an automated basis which we cannot do now well. you can promote the interests of sharing and security.

the next one in the blue shirt in the middle. >> does the current classification system aid or hinder sharing? how would you enhance information sharing in the digital age? >> there is nothing wrong with the system. it is how it is used in making classification determination. one way to remove the hindrance is two not classified anything. the information sharing can be taken to an extreme. this gets to the issue of over- classified. that is an allegation often made. there is probably some substance to those accusations.

my intelligence community experience is that a lot of what drives or motivates classification decisions given the volume of data that we deal with is affected by contemporaneously circumstances. something we classify it today, you might make a different determination looking at it five years from now. we are very conservative. that is a personal opinion and not company policy, about de classifying company material. this is another one of those are holy grails, the ideal sweet spot for classifying. we should not over-classified or under-classified. it should be in the middle. difficult thing to do

day in and day out. >> thank you. the gentleman in the red tie. >> i am with the alliance systems. which agency has the lead responsibility for sharing information about suspicious activity that indicates an imminent attack, making sure the original stakeholders are aware of that? is this a structured data problem or an operational problem? who is making sure there is not a problematic seam between the two perspectives? >> your question is about the agency? >> which agency has the legal responsibility to make sure procedures and protocols are in place?

so you do not have to wait through the hours of databases and can get active on at the regional level. >> say there is one agency with a legal obligation to do that, it is a collective responsibility we all have. under the scenario you cite, is state and local officials. it starts with the citizenry, someone who witnesses an event and gets it to the appropriate authorities. that speaks to the suspicious activity reporting. it is not set up that way that

one element is exclusively responsible, legally accountable for ensuring the warnings are passed quickly. it is a collective responsibility. it is my responsibility -- i have been placing emphasis on immigration. horizontal in the intelligence community and berkeley -- vertically in law enforcement. it is not a hierarchy. it is two ways. the nexus are the fusion centers. there are 72 of them that i look upon as the organizational nexus for bringing information

up from the local level for bringing it down from the federal level. off o >> you talked about the insider threat policy. can you talk more about what that involved and where it is in the process? wikileaks, where is that and what has taken so long? can you talk about the insider threat policy you mentioned? you said we need to develop an insider threat policy, if i understood you correctly. what does that involve and where is it in the process? >> i do not know where the written document is if that is

what you are referring to. but inherently, we have always had a responsibility for detecting insider threats in the intelligence community. wikileaks has heightened our sensitivity about that. in an i.t. context, an insider threat is quite profound. that is why everyone is more sensitive to being alert to detect insider threats. there is not a silver bullet. you have to have auditing and monitoring. we have done a lot over the last three or four years to enhance and improve and streamline the clearance process. that is another dimension that gets at the issue of personal trust.

>> the last question over here, the gentleman with glasses. >> i am peter bishop. could you expand where you say you are not looking primarily to new technology but doing more in the way of writing policies? presumably that means you are not waiting for new technology to move forward. on the opinion, you are still open its new technology is developed -- if new technologies developed to enhance the sharing of information. could you expand on that? >> i think you just said it and answered your own question. that is right. this has always been about governance and oversight, leadership, if you will. acquire thee to

technology and substantiate it, where there is confidence and assurance about the data, its content, and with whom it will be shared, that serves to enhance sharing. to the extent we bring to bear, technology would help to facilitate that. our big idea aside, absolutely. >> we have agreed agenda today. i encourage you to stay behind and address the rest of the agenda. i want to thank our sponsors, ibm, and mr. clapper for taking time to share on this important topic. [applause]

[captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] reconvene atg to 10:45. with coffee and doughnuts in the back. >> returned the groups the white house. live coverage of the presidential candidates from florida today include mitt romney in panama city and later tonight, a speech by newt gingrich at the lincoln day dinner in west palm beach at 8:00. here's a look at some of the eds the candidates have been running in florida. >> florida families lost everything in the housing crisis. newt gingrich cashed in. he was paid over $1.6 million by

the agency that helped to create a crisis. >> i offered in vice as and historian. >> he was censured for ethics violations. he resigned from congress in disgrace. he cashed in as a d.c. insider. if he wins, this guy would be very happy. >> i am mitt romney and i approved this message. >> if he is dishonest to obtain the job, he will be dishonest on the job. >> what kind of man would distort and the scene just to win? this man. he said he has always voted republican when he has had the opportunity. in the 1992 massachusetts primary, he had the chance to vote for a george bush or pat buchanan. he voted for the liberal democrat instead. he said his investment in fannie and freddie were in a blind trust. as reported in the national journal, he earned thousands of dollars from investments not in

a blind trust. he denied seeing a false at his campaign used to attack newt gingrich, iran the's -- but mitt romney's campaign approved it and his voice is on it saying he approved it. if we cannot trust him on his record, how can we trust him on anything? >> tomorrow, our campaign coverage continues with the chairman of the republican party of florida. he will talk about the upcoming primary and help candidates are conducting their campaigns. you can watch that at 10:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. here on c-span. >> it would be intolerable if a handful of violent people could us against needed

change. the republican convention in 1964 had governor rockefeller shouted down. gov. wallace was heckled into silence. it happened to me in philadelphia. we must give notice to this violent feud. there are millions of decent americans willing to sacrifice for change. they want to do it without being threatened. they want to do it peacefully. they are the non-pilot majority -- non-violent majority. these other people -- these are the people whose voice i want to be. >> we look back at 14 men who ran for the office and lost. you can see video of the contenders who had a lasting impact on american politics. >> our ancestors came across the ocean in sailing ships. when they arrived, there was nothing here. they built their tiny cabins.

they did it with neighbors helping one another, not federal grants. [applause] they came here because they wanted to be free and practice the religion of their choice. after 200 years, too many of us take those privileges for granted. >> c-span.org/thecontenders. >> next, the new fiscal budget. it was unveiled with an additional budget for overseas operations. it sets the stage for nearly half a trillion dollars in cuts over the next 10 years. this is one hour and 20 minutes.

>> good afternoon, everybody. as all of you know, this department has undertaken a very fundamental review of its defense strategy, and of our spending priorities. the reasons for their review are clear. first of all, we are at a strategic turning point. after a decade of war, and after a substantial growth in the defense budget. second, the congress of the united states, through the passage of the budget control act has required that the defense budget be reduced by $487 billion over 10 years. to accomplish this effort, we decided that it was important to make this an opportunity to develop a new defense strategy

for the united states, and for the u.s. military force that we wanted for the future. that strategy has guided us in making a series of tough budget choices, and establishing a new set of defense budget priorities. the ongoing process reached an important milestone earlier this month with the release of the new strategic guidance and the priorities for a new 21st century defense. it will be reflected in the decisions that have been made and will be presented in the president's budget. when i announced the new guidance, i highlighted five key elements of the strategy and five key elements of the vision that we have for the military force of the future. let me summarize each of those.

first, the military will be smaller and leaner, but it will be agile, flexible, rapidly deployable, and technologically advanced. it will be a cutting edge force. second, we will rebalance our global posture and presence to emphasize where we think the potential problems will be in the world, and that means emphasizing asia pacific and the middle east. third, we will maintain our presence elsewhere in the world, and we will do that by building innovative partnerships, and strengthening key alliances, and developing new partnerships elsewhere in the world -- europe, africa, latin america, and elsewhere.

fourth, we will insure that we can quickly confront and defeat aggression from any adversary, any time, any place. fifth, we will protect and prioritize some very important and key investments in technology and new capabilities, as well as our capacity to grow, adept, mobilize, to surge as needed. given the fiscal constraints that have been imposed on the department, our approach was to develop this force for the future with some pretty important guidelines. we wanted to maintain the

strongest military in the world. we committed ourselves not to hollow out the force, as has been done in the past in these types of drawdowns, to take a balanced approach by putting everything on the table, and to not break faith with the troops and their families. i want to think the entire leadership of this department, military and civilian alike, for their participation and support in this effort. this has truly been a team effort, and i am deeply appreciative of their cooperation. we are united in the belief that this strategy and the resulting budget decisions follow the right approach to meet the country's most pressing security challenges, and to preserve the strongest military in the world, and at the same time meet fiscal responsibilities.

today, i would like to offer a preview of the decisions we made to help build the budget request for fiscal year 2013, and the future years defense plan. this plan reduces spending, consistent with the budget control act, over 10 years, by $487 billion, but in the five- year budget presented by the president we reduce the defense budget by $289 billion over the next five years the department will specifically request -- five years. the department will specifically request in its base billion.9 -- %525$525 by the way, that compares to $531 billion in fiscal years 2012. our hope and plan is to rise to

$567 billion by fiscal 2017. i would point out that the projected growth before we had to do this was to reach about $622 billion by 2017. fiscal year 2013, we will ask for an additional $88.4 billion for overseas contingency operations, oco funds, that compares to $115 billion we received in fiscal year 2012, all of that, to maintain support obviously for our troops in combat. we believe this is a complete package that follows the five key elements that i described. you have the specifics in the package you have been provided, and i know the deputy and the vice chair will fill you in on

any additional specifics you are interested in. i wanted to summarize some of the key decisions. with regards to the area of developing a smaller, leaner, but agile, flexible, and technologically against force, -- advanced force, we knew that coming out of wars and dealing with budget reductions of this magnitude, the military would be smaller, but the key, as tough as it was to make the decisions with regards to drawing these down, the key is to fashion an agile and flexible military force that we need in the future. what that means for the services is that we will have an adaptable and battle-tested army that is our nation's force for decisive action, capable of defeating any adversary on land. let me say that again. capable of defeating any adversary on land -- we will

have a significant land force presence in places like korea and the middle east. at the same time, we will emphasize special operations forces. we will also emphasize a rotational presence, so that we can establish the kinds of partnerships that i discussed, and provide training and the device in other parts of the -- and advice in other parts of the world. we will have a navy that maintains a foreign presence, and is able to penetrate and the penetrate. and maybe has agility built into the force. -- the navy has agility built into the force. the air force is the same. it will be an air force that dominates air and space, providing rapid mobility,

global strike, and unman capabilities through their operators as well. a marine corps that is in the white expeditionary force with -- middle-weight expeditionary with reinvigorated and amphibious capabilities. all of this will network into a highly capable force for the future. we made a choice to retain the most successful and technologically advanced platforms that we will need for the future. that involves unmanned systems, satellites, submarines, helicopters, aircraft carriers, and fifth generation aircraft. we are looking at multi-mission

weaponry and technology that can support that kind of a joke for. -- of agile force. striking the right balance between force structure and readiness is critical to our efforts, to avoid a hollow force, and we will continue to focus on this area to make sure we make the right choices. in this budget, we plan to gradually resize the active army reaching the 490,000, down from the present force level of 562,000, and the active marine corps will go to 182,000, and that is down from two hundred two thousand. that transition will take place over the five years. we will not reach those numbers until 2017. this plan maintains a very significant army and marine force, with both forces at larger levels than they were at prior to 9/11.

they will be fundamentally reshaped by a decade of war. they will be far more lethal, battle-hardened, and ready. the change in the size of our ground forces allowed us to examine the air force airlift fleet. our review determined we could reduce, and streamline our air fleet with minimal risk. we are retiring some a aging c5a's, but will maintain the capability. -- a healthy airlift capability. we currently have 60 air force tactical air squadrons, and the review determined we could eliminate 6 of the 60, as well as one training squadron.

none of that will limit our ability to dominate the skies. the navy is protecting our most flexible ships. destroyers and combat ships. it will retire lower priority cruisers that have not been updated with ballistic missile defense capability, or that require significant maintenance, as well as combat logistics' and fleet support ships. as we build this leaner and more agile force, we frankly need to look at a department that is leaner and more agile as well. for that reason, this budget seeks to reduce excess overhead, eliminate waste in this department, and improve business practices across the department. we have identified about $60

billion in savings over five years, on top of the substantial efficiency efforts already underway. this will involve areas such as aggressive and competitive contracting processes, better use of information technology, streamlining the staff, reductions in contract services, and better inventory management. as a result of all of this, we will also need to look at facilities and the structure -- infrastructure, balancing overseas forward presence requirements with basing requirements back home. in this budget requirement, we simply cannot sustain the infrastructure that is beyond our means or ability to maintain, therefore the president will request the congress to authorize the use of the base realignment and closure process, with the goal of identifying additional savings and implementing them as

soon as possible. the second carrier -- area, rebalancing our global posture and presents to emphasize the asia pacific and middle east areas. the budget protects and in some cases increases our investments in these areas. that includes a capability to strike over long distances. and penetrate enemy defenses. we will be funding the next generation bomber and sustaining the current bomber fleet. we will move ahead with our next generation aerial refueling tanker. bringing in a stabilizing presence in combat power as needed, with an emphasis on these critical regions, the marines will sustain their

level of presence in the pacific. the budget supports an enhanced partnering opportunity with australia and others, such as the philippines. in all of these cases, we will do this in a way that respects the sovereignty of the nations that we will be working with. it also provides the resources to forward station combat ships in singapore and a control pact -- craft in bahrain. this will require maintaining the aircraft carrier fleet at 11 ships with 10 air wings, and maintaining our big back amphibious fleet. modernizing our submarine fleet will also be critical to maritime access in these vital

regions. in this effort the navy will invest in a design that will allow new virginia class submarines to be modified. for more missiles and under-sea strike options. across the force, we will invest in upgraded sensors for aircraft, ships, and missiles, and the most electronic warfare capabilities. it requires the army to return to full spectrum training, developing a versatile mix of formations and equipment to succeed on land, including in environments where access will be contested. the army will maintain its significant force structure in the pacific, including the korean peninsula, and will

maintain an operationally responsible peacetime presence in the middle east as well. the third area -- building innovative partnerships and strengthening our alliances throughout the world envisions an army that develops innovative approaches that ensure our continued engagement with allies and partners across the globe. for example, in europe, while we are taking down two brigades, we will maintain two brigades, and outlined a brigade team with come and, and rotate our deployments on the continent, so that our forces have more opportunities to train and operate with european counterparts. more broadly, the united states will continue to invest in

shared capabilities and responsibilities with nato, responding to the alliance's most critical needs such as ballistic missile capabilities. elsewhere in the world, the gradual drawdown of the post- 9/11 wars will provide more opportunities for special operations forces to assist and advise our partners in other regions. and, we prioritize the most important programs for building partnership capacity. fourth, we will ensure that we can quickly confront and defeat aggression from any adversary, anytime, anywhere, reaffirming that the united states must have the capability to fight more than one conflict at the same time. still, the changing nature of the conflict demands greater flexibility to shift and deploy forces to be able to fight and

defeat any enemy, anywhere. the strategic guidance recognizes that we are dealing with the changing realities of the world that we live in in the 21st century. we are not just facing conventional threats. we're facing technological threats. we have to be prepared to be able to leap ahead technologically in order to be able to confront those kinds of adversaries. this requires that we have the capability to defeat the enemy across a broad horizon of different conflict. the budget leverage is, as a result of that, and new concepts in space, cyberspace,

special operations, long-range precision strike capabilities to ensure we can defeat and confronted accuracies. that allows for all three legs of the nuclear triad. bombers, missiles, and submarines. our review determined we could achieve better cost control by the lane the ballistics simmering for two years without harming our nuclear deterrent. we're equally committed to a strong and safe return to achieve national security objectives. lastly with regards to new investments in technology, we have to maintain a decisive technological edge.

we have to retain the kind of leverage the lessons of recent conflicts have given us, and we need to stay ahead of the most lethal and disruptive threats we will face in the future. that meant protecting or increasing investments in cyber capabilities, the ability to project power in denied areas, special operations forces, the kind that conducted the bin laden raid and the rescue of the hostage. in order to protect vital investments for the future, we protected science and technology programs as well. at the same time the strategic guidance recognizes the need to prioritize and distinguish urgent needs from those that can be delayed, particularly in

light of schedules and cost problems. we made reasonable adjustments to a number of programs. let me briefly mention the change with regards to the joint strike fighter. it is a program the remains essential for the future of our superiority. we have to develop the next- generation fighter, and we will. in this budget, we have slowed the procurement to be able to complete more testing and allow for developmental changes before we buy in significant quantities. we want to make sure before we go into full production that we are ready. the four structure risks -- force structure shifts entailed some risks, but to manage that

risk, we will maintain the guys that have -- mobilize surge and maintain the guys that have experience, even as their overall strength decreases to ensure that we have the structure and experienced leaders necessary to regrow the force quickly if we have to. another component will be maintaining a quick and ready operational components, leveraging 10 years of experience in war. consequently, we are maintaining a strong army reserve and national guard. there will be no reductions in the marine corps reserve. the air force will make balanced reductions in the international -- air national

guard, consistent with reductions in both be active component and air force reserve. the budget recognizes that a critical part of our ability to mobilize is a healthy industrial base. maintain the vitality of the industrial base and avoiding imposing unnecessary costs and risks on our critical suppliers will guide many of the decisions we have made. now, let me turn to the quality our all-volunteer force. the most fundamental element in our strategy and process is our people. this budget recognizes that our people, far more than any weapons system, far more than any technology, are the great strength of the united states military. for that reason we focused first on every other area of the defense enterprise for savings in order to minimize any impact on the quality of the troops

and their families. as a result, we were able to sustain our in house critical -- or enhance critical support programs, while reforming and reorganizing others to be more effective and responsive to the needs of the troops and their families. yet, in order to build the force needed to defend the country under existing budget constraints, the escalating growth in personnel costs must be confronted. this is an area of the budget that has grown by nearly 90% since 2001. the budget will contain a road map to try to address the cost of military pay, health care, and retirement in ways we believe our fair, transparent, and consistent with the fundamental belief in our people. we recognize that we can never

repay our service members or their families for all their sacrifices. on compensation for service members, we have created sufficient room in the budget to allow for full pay raises in 2013 and 2014 that keep pace with increases in private sector pay. in addition, let me make clear, nobody's paid will be cut. nobody's pay will be cut. with regards to pay raises, however, in order to achieve cost savings, we will provide more limited pay raises beginning in 2015, giving troops and their families fair notice and lead time. on health care, another area of tremendous cost growth in the department, we avoided changes that will negatively impact off-duty troops or their families, jake active duty

troops or their families, -- active-duty troops or their families, protecting health care services for these troops, our wounded warriors. we decided to help control the growth of health-care costs, which is almost $50 billion in this department, we are recommending increases in health care fees, copays, and deductibles for retirees that will be phased in over five years, but let me be clear that even after these increases, the cost borne by military retirees will rename the low levels of -- remain below levels in most comparable private-sector plans, as they should be. we also feel the most fair way is establishing a commission with authority to conduct a comprehensive review of military retirement. the president and the department have made clear that the retirement benefits of those

who currently serve will be protected by grandfathering their benefits. there will be, for those who served today, no changes in retirement benefits. finally, let me just conclude. putting together this kind of budget that maintains the quality of an all-volunteer force, and implements significant, mandated savings has been a significant -- difficult undertaking. this has been tough work. at the same time, we have viewed it as an opportunity to shape the force we need for the future. i believe we developed a complete package, a line set to achieve strategic gains. the bottom line is there is little room for significant modification if we want to insure the force we believe we

preserve the forests and capabilities we believe we nee d to protect the country and the missions we have to deal with. ultimately, we will need the support and a partnership of congress to implement the vision that we have for our future military. we look forward to working with the congress in this effort. after all, it was a bipartisan congress that mandated that we reduce the defense budget by $487 billion over 10 years, so we look forward to their partnership in this effort. make no mistake, the savings that we are proposing will impact on all 50 states, and many congressional districts across america.

this will be a test, a test of whether reducing the deficit is about talks, or about action. i understand how tough these kinds of issues can be. i understand also of this is the beginning, and not the end of this process. my hope is that when members understand the sacrifice involved in reducing the defense budget by almost one- half of $1 trillion, that it will convince congress of the important responsibility that they have to make sure we avoid sequestration. that would be a doubling of the cuts, another $500 billion in additional cuts that would be

required to take place through a meat axe approach, but we are convinced would hollow out the force. and inflict severe damage to national defense for generations. the leadership of this department, military and civilian, we are united behind the strategy we have presented, and we look forward to working closely with the leaders of the hill to do what american people expect of their leaders -- to be fiscally responsible at a time of record deficits, to use this time to develop the force we need for the future -- a force that can effectively defend this country, support our men and women in uniform and

their families, and that is and always will be the strongest military power in the world. >> thank you, mr. secretary. just a few weeks ago we released a new defense strategy that keeps america safe and represents a clear strategic choices in the context of a persistently dangerous and increasingly competitive security environment that are proposed in the budget for the next fiscal year. the joint chiefs and i worked closely with the president and secretary leon panetta, and we made sure the unique strengths of each service were recognized. at the same time, we put national security above parochial interests, exactly what the american people should expect from us. we prepared a budget that strikes a necessary balance

between succeeding in today's conflicts and preparing for those of tomorrow, accounting for real risks and real constraints, representing strong investments in our national security, but make no mistake, the trade-offs were tough. the choices were complex. the difficult decisions produce $259 billion dollars in the next five years in savings. this is just our first installment. it still makes an desman in our security. -- an investment in our security. it maintains our military's decisive edge, and helps maintain america's global leadership, keeping faith with the true source of military strength, our people. much will be said and written about the individual decisions, and some might be tempted to

who view them through the prism of a zero sum game, pursing through each change to look for a winner and a loser. that is the least productive way to assess this budget. the merits of our choices should be viewed in the context of men involved in security department jake -- of an evolving security environment and a longer term plan. this is the first step. it is a down payment as we transition from an emphasis on today's wars to preparing for tomorrow's. let me make some brief points about what this budget means for the joint force of 2020. capability is more important than size. we will get leaner. this budget does not lead to a military in decline. rather, it builds a force that natchez capability to needs, to a joint force that is global and net worth, merciful and --

networked, versatile, innovative, ably led, and always ready. it is a military that can win any conflict, anywhere. second is the issue of compensation reform. i want to make clear that cuts in spending will not fall on the shoulders of our troops. there are no proposed freezes in pay, no change in the health-care, but we cannot ignore hard realities. pay-in benefits are one-third of the defense budget. pay will need to grow more slowly. the budget proposes modest increases in health care fees, copays, and deductibles for retirees. we need to look at retirement, but we will take the time to determine how to enact reforms over the next year. last is risk.

the primary risks lie not in what we can do, but how much we can do, and how fast we can do it. the risks are in time and capacity. we fully considered them, and i am convinced we can manage them by insuring we keep the force balanced, investing in new capabilities and preserving a strong reserve component. we will face greater risk if we do not change the way we have been doing things. three weeks ago i noted we have a real strategy that reflects real choices. the president's forthcoming budget proposal embodies these realities, and i am confident it needs of our nation's needs for our future. thank you. >> we have time for a few questions. >> over the next 10 years, do you see where the actual spending will go down from year-to-year, and for the american public, how do you

explain what appears to be contradictory, as you talk about this $500 billion in cuts in defense budget that will be increasing over time? quickly, can you address the 490,000, as far as the size of the army, and what are the actual risks in the size? >> the simplest way to say this is that under the budget that was submitted in the past we had a projected growth level, and that would have provided for almost $500 billion in growth, and we had obviously dedicated back to a number of plans and projects that we would have. that has to be cut, and that is a real cut in terms of what our projected growth would be. so, the reason you are seeing

the tough decisions presented to you in the implementation and strategy is because we had to achieve savings that would meet the requirement that congress gave us, and that is tough, real, and something that will cause some pain, but at the same time we recognize defense has to play a role in dealing with the national deficit. >> in terms of the size of the army, i am confident 490 active is the right number for 2017. it might not be the right number for 2020. i have always said the earnings -- the army needs to be adaptable enough to provide the greatest number of options given the security environment that we face.

so, we grew the army to confront a particular conflict, to conduct stability operations counter insurgency operations. those demands are going down. it is perfectly reasonable that the force structure would go down as well. >> secretary, you talked about the additional requests for more -- war spending, $88.4 billion. given that one year ago, we had sizable amounts of troops in iraq, and numbers are coming down in afghanistan, why is it still so high? give us a sense of what that is for, the $88.4 billion. >> we are still maintaining a significant force in afghanistan to conduct the war there, and the cost associated with that effort is very significant, as we try to deal with the supplying of our troops. this is not as easy as iraq in

terms of our ability to provide the supplies and needs that our troops need. that, plus, obviously, as we draw down the surge, maintaining a fairly large number of troops that will be present in afghanistan -- supporting them, giving them the best supplies and weaponry they need to meet this mission will continue to require support and funding under the oco. there are two groups that put demands on. one is the commander for the operation. the other is the service chiefs or recapitalization. we have always said it would take years following the end of the conflict to recapitalize the course.

>> mr. secretary, are you seriously considering asking the president to ask congress for another run of base closures? civilians are still trying to deal with the 2005 base closures. for general dempsey, there is a line that you want to restart the strike capability. the obama administration has resurrected its bank. what has changed to prevent an adversary. you can lower introductory and avoid the confusion you are talking about in terms of its

being mistaken for a nuclear warhead. fundamentally, that is it. >> it is a fundamental problem we have to confront. we have got to take a look at the infrastructure supporting the remaining force. we have to be able to reduce debt and for structure. the commission will look at those recommendations and make a complete presentation to the congress. the process provides that kind of process. i have been through it. i know its weaknesses and it's aliens.

-- its failings. we will continue to work to achieve the savings we hope to achieve from the process. there is no more effective process to make it happen we did not want to tie any savings to it. we need congress to authorize it before we decide. >> $60 billion for projected savings. how detailed are the savings? >> it is pretty detailed.

you have to have some meat on the bone. secretary gates begin that process. we have gone back and said, ok, what have we done to try to meet the goals and signed by secretary gates. there has been some good progress made with regard to those efficiencies.

>> are you talking about civilian layoffs? >> we are talking about civilian pay. >> the budget calls for protecting that investment. considering how much special operations forces' worth has increased, do you believe the funding is increasing enough? secretary, you say you hope congress will see the sense in the budget, as a former congressman, can you give us a reality check? >> on special operations, you may have heard me say before. when you say what is new over the last 10 years, notably three things. the capability of the special

operating forces. i am confident that each of those three new and emerging capabilities are adequately funded in this budget. in balance, the special operating forces can only be special if there is a conventional force that allows them to conduct their operations and shape the environment. we have to do this in balance. i am confident we have done that. >> look, this is going to be tough. this is a tough challenge. no one can underestimate how difficult it will be. that is one of the problems with dealing with the whole issue of deficit reduction. it is easy to talk about deficit reduction. it is tough to do something that reduces the deficit.

what we are presenting here in this strategy does something about reducing the deficit and achieving the savings. it is going to m. bass members, is going to impact districts -- going to impact members and district. when i was in the congress, i went through this process. i understand what it means. it is an opportunity for members to show the leadership the country expects of them when it comes to dealing with this challenge. we have presented a great blueprint for the kind of defense we need for the future. it does its bank in a way that achieve the savings we think are necessary and does not weaken our national defense. -- it does in in a way -- does it in a way that achieve the savings we think are necessary and does not weaken our national defense.

>> general, perhaps you can help me better understand. you talk about protecting some measure of risk. you talk about the ground forces being higher than 9/11. there will still be aircraft carriers what is the risk and what are the hard choices? >> we think we have dealt with those risks because of the combination of forces we have in place and the ability to

mobilize quickly. it will give us the capability to deal with any threat. nevertheless, there is a risk. there is a risk on the technological area. we are depending on having the technological edge of the future. we have to leap forward if we are going to deal with the challenges we face. we have to be smart enough, created enough to develop the kind of technology we will need to confront the future. i am confident we can. there are risks associated with it. the risks we are going to be facing come with some of the areas where we have had to reduce the budget. what we have done is to try to develop the kind of agility and capability so that we can respond to the threats we are

going to face in the 21st century. i think this is before us for the future. are there risks associated with it? you bet. can we make them acceptable? you bet. >> the greater risk is, had we decided we would just wish away any particular capability or any form of conflict -- saying we are never going to do that -- what you are expressing is the recognition that we are retaining our full spectrum capability. we did not take any risks with that. >> we have time for one more question. >> mr. secretary, in terms of security threats, what is worrying you most over the next 12 months? >> that is a set up. [laughter]

the one thing we had to do in developing this strategy and the one thing that distinguishes this from past drawdowns, as i said before, is that in past drawdowns, we have come to the end of a particular threat that we confronted. we could move on. the reality is that as we draw down from iraq and afghanistan, we still face a number of important threats in the world. obviously, we are continuing to fight a war in afghanistan. we continue to face the threat of terrorism. as successful as we have been in confronting that, we continue to see that challenge, whether it is in yemen or somalia and elsewhere. we are going to have to continue

to confront the threat of terrorism. we see the threat coming from iran and a nuclear cup -- nuclear capable iran represents a threat to us into the world. weapons of mass destruction and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction are a concern. north korea is a concern because they are developing a nuclear capability. add to that the turmoil in the middle east that we have to confront. add to that the whole cyber threat and the potential for cyber warfare. you can see the last -- vast array of the force we have designed here. all of those are my concerns for the future. >> ladies and gentlemen, that is the last question.

thank you very much. >> welcome to the table, the deputy secretary. we will not be taking a filing break. >> welcome again. we are here to answer your questions. i hope you all have a copy of the white paper, which describes key decisions that we have made in connection with the 2013 budget and the connection to the strategic guidance. i will comment on one of the questions that was already

asked. i should say, by the way, this is a pretty complete description of the many individual decisions we have made. there are many individual items. we are able to answer questions about any items in the white paper. we will not be reading the full budget. the president receives the full budget. we will not be going into detail on these items until we have had a chance to confer with congress, which will begin last week -- begin next week. the detail in here describes the in enormity of the adjustments we were required to make. the secretary described it well. the base budget is not decreasing over the years. but neither is it continuing to rise in real terms as it has over the past few years.

as we planned before the budget control act was enacted. the difference between the amount we plan to have and the amount last year that we now have, that is where the famous $487 billion comes from. that difference over 10 years, $259 billion over five years. an adjustment of about 9% overall, which is a substantial amount by any measure. if you add to that the reductions of overseas contingency operations and consider the entire defense budget, you can see that we needed to make the most consequential adjustments that this department has had to make bill -- make budgetary in over a decade. it is large. the decisions were steered by the strategic guidance that came

from president obama. this sequence of strategy is critical to us. no part of the budget was on examined -- unexamines. there are a lot of tough decisions in there. some parts of the budget were protected and even increased. inevitably, because of their importance to the country into the future, that meant other areas took more cuts. the result -- the secretary made the point -- is a carefully balanced package. this cannot be looked at or modified piece by piece. since a change in one area requires offsetting changes elsewhere. balancing the overall package.

first, our continued efforts to make more disciplined use of the taxpayers' money. second, we made investments in our structured investment. we made-an important adjustments in personnel costs. because of the value we place on the all volunteer force, there are lesser cuts in this category. the senior leadership, including the joint chiefs of staff, believe this category needed to be included. i am pleased to answer your questions. >> president obama has given his pledge to the aspirational goal of going to 0 in the -- there are no cuts at all in this briefing.

does this imply there will be no reductions in nuclear arsenals unless there are negotiations with russians and there is no negotiation to cut the nuclear force? >> there are no cuts made in the nuclear force in this budget. the white house -- we are working under their direction -- is considering the size and shape of the nuclear arsenal in the future. when those decisions come, we will factor them into our budget. i will make a couple of comments about what is in this budget that does bear on the nuclear triad. one is a slip by two years in the development of the ohio class replacement submarine. this is not a strategic decision. this is a managerial decision made for budgetary reasons, but

mostly because it puts the ohio replacement on a more predictable and escape -- and stable schedule. we did protect the bomber force in this budget. that is not just the nuclear bomber force, which is the committed to know bomber force. it is part of our capability. as we consider our ability as it applies to the pacific region, bombers play an important role in there. we are beginning a new long- range strike price -- strike platform. we did protect that. we started that last year. there are some things that bear on its bank. there are no decisions that are strategic in nature. >> secretary panetta lifted the probation. there is a slowing of production to allow --

there is an urgency to get as many of these as possible and get those carriers out of fleet. while the numbers of produced vehicles will be going down, the number of these produced will be going up to accommodate the marine corps. can you address whether or not in the development and requirements are going to address if there were any changes made as a result of some big concerns may -- >> you asked several questions in the near. with respect to the joint strike fighter, the secretary said it right. we want the airplane. we got some good news this year.

part of the program we are transitioning and try to reach full rate production. that is still a concern to us. our industry partners are working our way through that. we will ride up that curves to the full rate production. as far as the variance is concerned, with probation behind

us, all three are now on a more or less equal footing in terms of their engineering readiness to go forward. it becomes a decision for all of us and for the marine corps. >> i do not want to add too much more. it is a terrific airplane and we are committed to its bank -- to it. ability the manufactur to catch up and we wanted to be a part of our fleet. >> can you address any cyber vulnerabilities that might be in the aircraft? >> we are committed as a general matter to cyber vulnerabilit ies. it is a highly computerized airplane.

>> i know you did not want us to pick apart individual items. why not any of the big ticket items? there is no giant in here as we have come to expect. >> let me ask the admiral, who was a commander on the aircraft carrier. if you opened this paper, there are 50 or 60 things listed in there that we are not able to do. it is because of the reduction in our planned budget in the budget control act. there are plenty of things we plan to do that we will not be able to do.

they are not the things that are most important to our strategy and our future. sandy, over to you. >> it is well documented. we carefully examined inside the department. we can start with the white house. everybody is in agreement. the capability and the flexibility and the independent capability, the applicability of that and its particular useful role in the middle east and the pacific, which is where we have emphasized most of the regional, strategic focus here. it makes it a particularly adept platform for the things we want to do strategically in the future. it made no sense to take out any carrier force structure. we will stick with 11 carriers.

>> on the navy, the strategy prioritizes the four words -- forward -- and talks about getting rid of the class cruisers as well. without a replacement. how does that square with the posture of being forward deployed? >> it is more about where you are going to cut that where you are going to act. if you look at the navy plan, this gets to the chairman's point. this is a budget that has to look out to 2020 for some of these provisions, particularly delay the type things. you will find a gradual shift in

the navy for structure -- forestructure. i will leave it to the navy to articulate that in the coming weeks or so. >> if you look at what we are doing with australia and the possibility of combat ships in singapore and what we are doing on guam, there is quite a bit that represents a moving into the asia-pacific and to southeast asia and the indian ocean. you have to look at the whole picture. >> the secretary mentioned you want to keep people who got a lot of experience in iraq and afghanistan. the strategy diminishes the institutional role of the

strategy and cut the army strength. what do you say to someone in that situation or why they should stay? >> i would like to say something about that first. i would not dispute the premise of your question. the army is in the midst of a transition, a strategic transition. the army has been riveted on counterinsurgency operations in afghanistan. it is now returning to full spectrum training and capability. it will still be the army that can dominate any other army anywhere. it is trying to build forward

into that post-iraq and post- afghanistan army. it will have an important role in the strategy and in the asia- pacific area and in the middle east it has a vital role. i will answer your question. the premise is not right. >> all four services are absolutely critical to our strategy. to signal -- to a single one service out as being less critical does not get the idea correct about the strategy. if the military would -- were a stock right now, i would be buying. i would be by army, navy, air course the-air force-marine corps. does because we are reducing capacity to build up -- they have a tremendous role in asia.

there were helicopters that pulled hostages out of that camp. those were army helicopters. the army is important in regional engagement when we come out of afghanistan. i am bid on the army right now. has an important role in our strategy. >> there is tinted with some people who might ask themselves -- there are problems with some people who might ask themselves why they should stay. >> we will not have a problem keeping people at all. >> there was a briefing in applying the program has been canceled, terminated. i look at your materials. you are truncating the five and third generations. what are the helicopters being

used? black hawks or chinooks? >> sorry if this is a little tedious. there are several different versions of the block 30. it is a good example. we highlighted in the white paper. it is an example. we need to pay attention to cost performance. block 30 was supposed to replace the u2 for taking pictures through the air. the airline -- the ground surveillance is a version for the allies. those are not affected by this. the block 30 priced itself out for taking pictures in the air.

we hope to replace the u2 with the global hot. the global talk became expensive. -- the u2 with the global hawk. it became expensive. the block 30 is cancelled. >> that was an impressive operation. that was a joint operation. we had a baby seals and it was there and well executed. -- navy seals and it was well executed. >> i am carious. has the department and any war gaming about what it will do

with the strategy if congress does not change the -- it would make sense to think about it given the political asylum in the country is one where people are skeptical. >> the work of the super committee failed in mid- november. we were well on the way to putting this together at that time. the magnitude of the cuts would be disastrous for us. the strategy we gave you two or three weeks ago would have to

start over again with sequestration. the secretary said it at the end of his sentence. congress need to do it were. -- do its work. >> we went through a healthy process in this department of developing this budget. we did strategy and we allowed strategy to guide the budget decisions. if we get into a sequestration position, that turns the entire process on its ear. it takes a chainsaw to a budget that is developed. we will have to write a new strategy. that is not the way we want to go. >> some of the programs on the list are being delay. we were told when you do that, the unit cost goes up. are you creating further problems down the line when you will not be able to afford these

programs? >> we are attentive to that. managers of those programs are trying to mitigate that effect. when you are slipping and reducing the size of the buy. the reduction in regional defense, where do you expect that to have the most of that. how much time do the regional allies have to absorb what you are saying. >> first of all, we remain committed to the european capital approach. we intend to keep it on track. we are not going to decrease anything we have done so far. many other things in this budget will find themselves in a situation will -- where it will grow. we will have to work with our partners and ask them to invest in some of these capabilities.

in several regions of the world, you will see that. we are committed to working with our partners to defend them against missile attacks from rogue nations. >> it just means slowing growth and spending. >> yes. >> that would put the air force below the strategic line for that capability. have you discussed moving the line with congress? >> we will be discussing that and the other changes we are proposing. it is the president's budget proposed to the congress. this is capacity that is access to need. in this budget environment, you cannot justify retaining capacity that you do not need. >> you talked about reasons to

emphasize the asia-pacific. what are the biggest threat for the united states in this region. they are negotiating with the u.s. to involve more of a u.s. military presence. what is your position in the context of the south china seas disputes? >> this is a dynamic region. it will be a central region for the world going forward. the united states has played a pivotal role in the asia-pacific region for decades. that peace and prosperity was brought in part by american military roles that has allowed the prosperity of all countries bear to include china. you mentioned china. that pivotal role is something we intend to maintain and to

sustain. that is fundamentally the reason for being there. there are a number of issues and areas. it is a vast region. we intend to keep our pivotal role. you mentioned the philippines. we have a good relationship with the philippines, including a good security relationship. we wish to build on that in the future. >> we have time for two more questions. two more questions >>. . >> will the combat operations bear some of the risks that secretary panetta mentioned with respect to a smaller force? >> we are constantly cognizant of that. we did not planned on loading any of the risk and strategy on to our forces that are currently

in combat. we are committed to taking care of those troops to make sure they have what they need to get the job done. we are not putting rests on current combat operations. >> on the replacement, how is the delay schedule more predictable? how concerned are you that that program will eat the entire shipbuilding accounts in the future? >> the second and third are related. with respect to the schedule, the schedule, as it was, was an aggressive one merging on optimistic. this is a safer schedule for sure. it is a little more secure from a managerial point of view and a better place to be. in terms of cross replacement, the initial cost estimates came in unacceptably high.

they did present exactly their concerns, mainly that they would in the decade 2020 to 2013, consume a large proportion of the navy shipbuilding budget. the navy worked aggressively on the requirements. i should mention that the admiral is doing that as a more general rule in the requirement process in the building. we will amend the design and look at the drivers of cost in the design and manage the costs down. that was done from a figure in access of $6 billion to the neighborhood of $5 billion. that is something we need to do with all of our programs going forward.

we need to ask ourselves in this kind of budget environment, how much is good enough? 80% solution good enough? with that, i thank you. >> if you have any additional questions regarding the particular decisions, contact our press operations team. we have a team of folks who have been involved in these decisions standing by to be able to respond to more of your questions. thank you very much. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> we are going to turn that today "road to the white house. " we have live coverage of the gop presidential candidates from

florida today. that is expected to start in about five minutes at 1:45 eastern time. before we go to that event, we will look at a discussion about the nevada coppices, which will be held february 4. host: give us a sense of what the president's machine is going through. caller: -- guest: nevada is expected to be a battleground state once again. president obama and his

campaign have spent a lot of time on quietly organizing the state. democrats had their caucus last saturday. although there was no contest going on, they were able to get 12,000 people out to caucus locations across the state. that is the third step up energizing the base. there were volunteers recruited to work for him. i was not surprised there were 12,000 people. i attended one in the northern part of the state and we had one in the southern part of the state. people were definitely not like bay where the-not as excited as they were four years ago. the nevada caucuses -- people were not as excited as they were four years ago.

nevada stood down and florida got the coveted early spot. now that we have had a split decision by voters in the first three early states, it looks like nevada will play. we are starting to see television ads here. candidates are starting to make their way out west for the first time after the florida primary on tuesday. mitt romney is starting to get some people on the ground and get organization in place. the financial backing of one of las vegas' wealthiest casino moguls has given a tremendous amount of money to the super

pak -- superpac supporting newt gingrich. there is someone big in newt gingrich's corner here in the state. host: has there been polling as to who is on top leading to the caucuses? guest: what polling has been done as numbers that are fairly unreliable. the conventional wisdom is that mitt romney is the front runner here. he won the state four years ago with more than 50% of the vote. only ron paul really competed in nevada against mitt romney four years ago. he has locked up a lot of the establishment support from elected republicans in nevada. mitt romney has spent a lot of time over the last four years keeping his supporters engaged and talking to people in the

state. when polling is done, he is usually at the top of it. you see a bubble in nevada. i have heard a few polls that have newt gingrich within striking distance of new to -- of mitt romney. host: you talked about at. what is the tone of the ads? guest: they are just trying to get started. romney has a couple of advertisements, one positive and one going after newt gingrich on the issue of the foreclosure crisis. you see mitt romney going after newt gingrich or his time with freddie mac and accusing him of

cashing in on the housing crisis. it is felt acutely here in nevada. host: as far as the process for next saturday, walk us through it. will it be just the front runners or the nine that we saw? guest: i have not asked party officials but not the policy has been amended. we will definitely see ron paul and mitt romney, newt gingrich, rick santorum, we will see what happens to him after florida. as far as the process is concerned, that has been an entertaining story here in nevada. the state party has not been entirely organized of the last couple of years. they are not well-founded. they have left it up to the counties. they have given leeway to be counties to decide their caucus processes. some counties will start at 8:00 a.m. some will start at 9:00 a.m.

orthodox jews and other people who observe that on saturday's would not be able to participate in the 9:00 a.m. caucuses. they have established a second event caucus for those who cannot participate because of religious reasons. that will begin at 7:00 p.m. at nine. there is a point of irresponsibility on the part of the voter to figure out where their location is and what time it will start. particularly those on the east coast are going to have to wait a long time before we see results tonight. the- -- before we see the results of the caucus. host: is there anything you want to add that will be information for the viewers?

guest: the guy has some unique issues that have not been brought up. florida has similarities with the foreclosure crisis. we will be interested in hearing about how the candidates' policies on jobs sound. nuclear waste always comes up in presidential races in nevada. yucca mountain is the place they want to send nuclear waste. president obama has stopped that with the help of senator harry reid. we have a strong amount of -- strong number of hispanic voters. we are excited to have the president to campaign come out after spending so much time in the midwest and east coast. >> back to florida with the primary coming up on tuesday. mitt romney is expected to hold a campaign rally in panama city.

it looks like it will start a little late in the day. we will bring it to you as soon as it does. later, a speech by newt gingrich. that will be at 8:00 eastern time from west palm beach. before we go to the mitt romney events, we will take a look at the florida primary and the president's campaign schedule and your phone calls from earlier today. host: as always, there is a lively conversation going on on twitter. we will work in the tweets.

we will start by going over some of the stories of the day. we will start with obama's weekly address today. he has been on the road ever since the state of the union on tuesday talking about the plan he presented to congress. the president traveled to five battleground states. it is a travel schedule that the republicans are calling a campaign schedule. the president says, i took the blueprint across the country. people believe in the america that is within our reach. they are not sure that the right thing will get done.

gumming up the works for the entire country is not be idea our founding fathers had. those were the president's remarks from his weekly address this week. the president's education initiative that he presented when he was on the road this week. the headline is, mixed reviews. president obama outlined his plans to keep tuition costs in check, getting a wildly enthusiastic response at the university of michigan, ann arbor. they cheered affordable college costs. there were many references to michigan being a swing state. reaction to the president's

proposal and tying aid programs to affordability was more tempered. in academia, there was strong support for expanding the pool of money available. college education will suffer for tuition increases that were an inevitable result of state budget cuts. while they appreciated the present's at the -- advocacy, they were wary of his plan. the same issue comes up in the baltimore sun. the headline is "call it planned lacking details -- "college plan lacking details." this is the new york post take on it.

president obama warning the nation's university that he would cut their federal aid if debris -- increased tuition every year. a few articles about the president also educational initiatives. let's go to opening phones. first up is carroll, a democrat from new jersey. caller: good morning. i was calling about the professor from florida that did the political analysis. she said the people were upset with president obama. through her polling, that was their goal and how bad it was in florida. i was wondering, how come they are not upset with their republican governor and legislature? the other thing, i noticed you

ran rickey rubio's rebuttal address, but he did not run the president also address. host: we can look around for that and probably find it. we will have clips of that later. we have several events coming up later today. we will have mitt romney for president, a campaign rally at eastern shipbuilding company. a few things coming up later on c-span. let's go to gregg on the independent line. your comment today? caller: teachers are doing their jobs and trying to.

leave the military alone. let them do what they need to do. we need the military. we do not need rundown schools. if we do not -- if we are going to do cutting, fired the division of motor vehicles, homeland security, the patriot act. that is a lot of that we do not need. i will listen to whatever you comment on. host: do you agree with the budget cuts we were talking about for the military? do you think they were too steep? >> there were cuts on useless stuff like the national state registry. that is part of the reason we have high unemployment. people have to be able to get to work. host: we have michael on the republican line. from wisconsin. caller: now it is dismal beach, california.

you had a caller earlier talking about the depleted uranium. i know for a fact that this was used on the ground attack airplane. he might be familiar with the hawk that had they wrote recant and underneath the nose that is used to attack tanks. your average person is not want to be running into contact with this sort of thing. it is depleted uranium, not active uranium. on the second point i would say, for america. you can have any political belief from stone age to utopianism. we have been active communists in the white house right now. but that is cool, too. america gets a chance to see what this is and you get a chance to see how it works.

come november, you are going to have your chance to speak your mind in a way that means something to this -- to these politicians. thank you, c-span. host: thank you for the call. this is from today's washington post. romney comes out swinging. we talked about people. the gingrich campaign is that a critical juncture in florida. he has seen his fortunes quickly beakers -- quickly reversed. gingrich arrived with a lot of momentum. a new poll shows romney had regained a solid lead. the poll has romney at 38% and gingrich at 29%. ron paul with 40% and rick santorum with 12%. later in the article, it says a

wall street journal poll shows romney leading being rich nationally. the same poll showed romney doing significantly better than gingrich against president obama. that is the washington post today if you would like to read more. let's go back to the front. on the democratic line, we have new jersey. caller: good morning, c-span. thank you for the opportunity to talk about something that could be interesting to the listening audience. my concern is c-span and the media that has not brought much up on the american legislative exchange. highly conservative, vetted, republican organization that has been in existence for 27 years.

they have about 300 special interest groups. in wisconsin, the issue without governor scott walker and many of the senators. alec is comprised of 2000 legislators that paid $50 a year to join. the corporate and special interest people that do the legislation that these representatives bring back to their states for things like -- they call it voter fraud. they call it voter fraud.