cycles and into that sex when i was political director of the dfcc, we spent the time defending race is that would not happen. in 2010 in the worst election cycle for democrats in 75 years, i worked for a guy who had never held office or run for office before he found himself in the most expensive, most competitive senate race in the united states in 2010. these things have a way of moving and changing. our goal is to hold the senate. we know their arithmetic as lopsided and it is a tough challenge for it we know we have a lot of incumbents who are in red states where the president is expected to win but from the beginning of the cycle when no one gives a shot until today, our goal is to hold the senate and we will do everything in our power to try to do that. >> our goal is to win the sanitariasenate. >> what risky to up that night?

>> i sleep very soundly at night. [laughter] >> i also sleep very soundly at night. >> let me ask you topically this week, did the hillary rose and critical of mrs. romney have any dent on the issues oriented toward women you have been working on? >> a short answer is no. i spent as a short-term sideshow that is interesting for cable news. i notice the battle against women was talking earlier. every single term when we talk about jobs, debt, deficit, the budget, turner country around, the republicans, not the democrats, have targeted contraception, planned parenthood. josh is in favor of a motion that did not pass in mississippi.

the fact that this is supported by the democrats is not supported >> the war on women is ridiculous and if we have a war at women, they have a war on stay at home mothers. hilary rosen , this is a gimmick which is totally made up. >> that is it for us and thanks to both of you for being here to defend your party's campaign solutions. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> if you missed any of the interview, it airs again this afternoon at 6:00 p.m. eastern here on c-span. you can watch it any time on line at c-span.org. >> our specific nation --

mission is to work that human rights remain a -- an essential component of foreign policy. and that when we are evaluating our foreign policy moves globally, human rights can never be the only consideration but it has to be part of the dialogue. >> she is the president and ceo lantos foundation for human rights. >> we're talking about torture on terroro the war and hum and russia and the upcoming issue of whether the u.s. congress should pass the accountability act which we don't need to go into details but whether or not we will stay on record as saying human rights matter. the matter in russia, the matter in china. >> more with katrina lantos sweat, tonight on"q &a."

>> nearly 1500 perished on the ship called unsinkable. >> once the lookout bells were sounded, the lookouts sighted in a spurt ahead and they struck a bell's three times. that is a warning saying there is some logic said. does not mean dead ahead, it means ahead of the ship that it does not say what kind of object propelled the lookout went to a telephone and called down to the officer on the bridge to tell them what it is that they saw. when the farm was finally answered, the entire conversation was what do you see? the response was icebergs right ahead and the response from the officer was, thank you. >> samuel halpern on the troops and minutes of that night, part of american history tv on c-span

3. >> president obama was in boca raton, fla. last report he announced a new tax proposal, the buffett rule would require americans earning one more than $1 million per year to pay at least 30% of their income in taxes. tomorrow, on the eve of tax day, the senate is scheduled to vote on legislation modeled after the proposal. the president spoke for about 40 minutes. [cheers and applause] >> thank you. how is everybody doing today? it is great to be back in florida. [applause] it is great to be back in boca.

[laughter] [applause] [no audio] [applause] it is great to be at the home of the fighting owls. [applause] i want to first of all thank aidan leading us in the pledge of allegiance but giving me great details about the burrowing owls. explain it all to me and then he told me he wants my job. [laughter] i explained to him that the custers and requires your 35 years old so i will keep the seat warm for him. [applause] for a few more years. i want to thank her backup for that extraordinary performance. [applause] in addition to having an unbelievable singing voice, she

wants to be a teacher. she is an english major and we need great teachers out there so we are very proud of her. want to thank her president. [applause] the mayor of bogota on, susan welchill for hosting us today. we have also got your outstanding senator and former astronaut which is very cool, bill nelson in the house. [applause] a wonderful congressman, ted deutsch is here. and my great friend, congresswoman debbie wasserman schultz is here. [applause] and you are here which is very exciting. [applause] i am glad you guys came out.

i love you back. i do. [applause] now - i know this is a busy time of year. some of you are less than a month away from graduation. [applause] some seniors are in the house. [applause] pretty soon you will be closing the books at win early for the last time - wimberley - maybe will make that last trip to the beach or coyote jack's. [applause] you will be picking up a diploma that you worked hard for, your parents will be there and they will be beaming full of pride and then comes what folks call the real world.

i actually think colleges part of the real-world but obviously, there's a transition that will take place as you leave college and some of you may go on to postgraduate degrees but some of you may be out there looking for work. college is the single most important investment you can make in your future. [applause] i am proud you have made it and you have seen it through. i also know that the future can be uncertain. we have gone through the three toughest years in our lifetimes, economically. the worst financial crisis and economic crisis. our economy is now recovering but it is not yet where it needs to be. to many of your friends and neighbors are still hurting out there, they are still looking for workers. too many families are still searching for that sense of

security that started slipping away long before this recession hit. i have the amen corner here. [laughter] ourselves a ask central fundamental question as a nation, what do we have to do to make sure america is a place where if you work hard, if you are responsible, that that hard work and responsibility pays off. [applause] pierre reason it is important to ask this question is because there are alternative theories. there's a debate in this country right now -- can we succeed as a nation where a shrinking number of people are doing really, really well but a growing number are struggling to get by? or are we better off when everybody gets a fair shot? [applause]

and everybody does a fair share. [applause] and everybody plays by the same set of rules. [applause] that is what the debate in america is about right now. this is not just another run-of- the-mill gabfest in washington. this is the defining issue of our time. this is a make or break moment for the middle class. everybody who is aspiring to get into the middle class as well. we've got two very different visions of our future and a choice between and could not be clearer. keep in mind, i start from the belief that government cannot and should not try to solve every single problem we've got. [applause] government is not the answer to everything. my first job in chicago when i

was not much older than most of you was working with a group of catholic churches on the south side chicago in low-income neighborhoods to try to figure out how we can improve the schools and how we can strengthen never of it and strengthen families and i saw that the work that some of these churches did did more good for people in their 20s and any government program could. [applause] in those same communities, i saw that no education policy matter how well crafted or well-founded it is can't take the place of a parent's love and attention. i also believe that since government is funded by a huge that it has an obligation to be efficient and effective. [applause] that is why we have eliminated dozens of programs that were not working, announced hundreds of regulatory reforms to save businesses and taxpayers

billions of dollars. we have put annual domestic spending on a path to become the smallest share of our economy since eisenhower was in the white house since before i was born much less you being born. [laughter] i believe the free market is the greatest force for economic progress in human history. [applause] i also agreeing -- with our first republican president, a guy from my home state, a guy with a beard named abraham lincoln. [applause] and what lincoln said was through our government, we should do together what we cannot do as well for ourselves. [applause] that is the definition of a

smart government. that is the reason why we have a strong military, to keep us safe because i suppose each of us could grab whatever is around the house and tried to defend our country but we do better when we do it together. best military and the history of the world with the greatest men and women in uniform. we paid for that. [cheers and applause] that is why we have public schools to educate our children. [applause] if we did not have public schools, there would still be some families who would do very well and they could afford private schools or home school but there were the kids that would fall through the cracks so we do that together. it is one of the reasons we have laid down railroads and highways perry we cannot build a highway for ourselves. we've got to get our neighbors

and friends to go build a road. that is why we supported a research and technology that save lives and created an entire industry. the internet, a gps, all those things were created by us together, not by ourselves. it is the reason why we contribute to programs like medicare and medicaid and social security and unemployment insurance. [applause] because we understand that no matter how responsibly we live our lives, we know that eventually we will get older, we know that at any 0.1 of us might face hard times are bad luck for a crippling illness or a layoff and the idea that together we build this safety net, this base

of support, that allows all of us to take risks and try new things and maybe get a new job because we know there is this base we can rely on. these investments in things like education and research and health care, they have not been made as some grand scheme to redistribute wealth from one group to another. this is not some socialist dream. they have been made by democrats and republicans for generations because they benefit all of us and they lead to strong and durable economic growth. that is why we have made these investments. [applause] if you are here and i say you because you have financial aid [applause] or a stallone or scholarship --

[applause] which, by the way, was how i was able to finance my college education. that is how michaud got her college education. [applause] that does not as benefit you. it benefits whatever company might end up hiring you. and profiting from your skills. if one of you goes on to become the next steve jobs or mark zuckerberg or one of you discovers the next medical breakthrough, think about all the people whose lives will be changed for the better. we made an investment in new and we will get a return on the investments. [applause] when we guarantee basic security for the elderly or the sec for those looking for work, that does not make a week. what makes this week is when

fewer americans can afford to buy the products that businesses are selling. when fewer people are willing to take risks and start their new business because it doesn't work out, they worry about feeding their families. what drags our economy down is when the benefits of economic growth and productivity goal only to the few which is what has been happening for over a decade now. the gap between those of very, very top and everybody else keeps growing wider and wider. in this country, prosperity has never trickled down from the wealthy few. prosperity has always come from the bottom of from a strong and growing middle class. [applause] that is how a generation who went to college on the gi bill

including my grandfather helped build the most prosperous economy the world has ever known. that is why a ceo like henry ford made a point to pay his workers enough money so they could buy the cars they were building. he understood that there is no point in having all of this and nobody can buy my cars. i've got to pay my workers enough so they buy the cars and that in turn create more business and more prosperity for everybody. this is not about a few people doing well. we want people to do well. that is great but it is about giving everybody the chance to do well prepared [applause] . [applause] that is the essence of america. that is what the american dream is about. that is why immigrants have come to our shores because the idea was that it doesn't matter what your name is or what you look like, you can be named obama. [laughter] you can still make it if you

tried. [applause] and yet, we keep on having the same argument with folks who don't seem to understand how it is that america got built. let me just say -- the folks who we have political arguments with, they are americans love their country. democrats, republicans, independents -- we all love this country but there is a fundamental difference in how we think we move this country forward. these folks keep telling us that if we weaken regulations that keep our air or water clean or protect our consumers, if we would just convert these investments we are making through our government in

education and research and health care, if we just turn us into tax cuts especially for the wealthy, somehow the economy will grow stronger. that is the theory. here is the news -- we tried this for eight years before it took office. [applause] we tried it. it.s not like we didn't try at the beginning of the last decade, the wealthiest americans got to "huge tax cuts, 2001 and 2003. meanwhile companies, financial restitutions were allowed to write their own roles were find a way around roles. we were told the same thing we're being told now -- this will lead to faster job growth and lead to greater prosperity for everybody. guess what? it did not.

yes, the rich got much richer. corporations made big profits but we also had the slowest job growth in half a century. the typical american family actually saw their incomes fall by about 6% even though the economy was growing. because more and more of that growth was just going to a few and the average middle-class america was not seeing it in their paychecks. health care premiums skyrocketed, financial institutions started making bets with other people's money that or reckless, and then our entire financial system almost collapsed. do you remember that? it was not that long ago. you guys are young but it was pretty reasons. now, some of you may be science majors in here -- [applause] i like that.

we need more scientists and engineers. now, i was not a science major. [laughter] i enjoyed science when i was young. if i recall correctly, if an experiment fails badly - you learn from that, right? sometimes you can learn from failure. that is part of the data that teaches you stuff, that expands our knowledge, but you don't keep on doing the same thing over and over again. you go back to the drawing board. you try something different. but that is not what has been happening with these folks in washington. a lot of the folks who are peddling the same trickle-down theories, including members of congress and some people running for a certain office right now who shall not be named -- [laughter] [applause]

they are doubling down on these old broken-down theories. instead of moderating their views. instead of saying it really did not work and the homeless at second great depression and maybe we should try something different. they have doubled down. they proposed a budget that showers the wealthiest americans with even more tax cuts and then pays for these tax cuts by gutting investments in education, medical research, and clean energy, in health care. [boos] >> if the cuts they are proposing are spread out evenly across the budget, than 10 million college students

including some of you, would see your financial aid cut by an average of more than $1,000 each. [booos] now, thousands of medical research grants for things like alzheimer's and cancer and aids would be eliminated. tens of thousands of research and students and teachers could lose their jobs. our investments in clean energy that are making us less dependent on imported of oil would be cut by nearly 1/5. by the time you retire, instead of being enrolled in medicare like today's seniors are, you'd get a voucher to pay for your health care plan but if health care costs rise faster than the amount of the voucher like they have been for decades, the rest of it comes out of your pocket. if the voucher is not enough to buy a plan with specific doctors

and care you need, you are out of luck. by the middle of the next century, -- by the middle of this century, excuse me, at a time when most of you will have families, funding for most of the investment i talked about today would have been almost completely eliminated altogether. this is not an exaggeration. this is math. i said this about a week ago and the republicans objected. they just gave a big number and we have just done the math. this is what it would mean. they said we did not specifically proposed to cut student loans. ok, if you don't cut student loans, that means you've got to cut basic research even more the

money has to come from somewhere. you cannot do over $4 trillion of additional tax cuts to people like me to do not need them and were not asking for them and it just comes from some magic tree somewhere. if they want to dispute anything i've said, they should show specifically where they would make those cuts. [applause] there are proposing to increase defense spending so it is not coming out of there. show me. america has always been a place

where anybody who is willing to work and play by the rules can make it, a place where prosperity does not trickle-down from the top, it grows from the bottom, it grows outward from the heart of a vibrant middle class. [applause] i believe that we cannot stop investing in the things that help create that, that create real long lasting broadbased growth in this country and we certainly should be doing it -- should not be doing it just so the richest americans can get another tax cuts. we should be strengthening those investments. we should be making college more affordable. [applause] we should be expanding our investment in plant energy. [applause] paris the other thing the republicans will tell you that we have to make these drastic

cuts because our deficit is too high. our deficit is too high. their argument might actually have a shred of credibility to it if you did not find out that they wanted to spend $4.60 trillion on lower tax rates. i don't know how many of you are math majors or business majors -- [applause] you cannot pay down a deficit by taking in $4.60 trillion of less money. that denies when you make all these cuts. it does not set up. it does not make sense. keep in mind that more than $1 troy the tax cuts they propose would be going to people who make more than $250,000 per year. that is an average of that least $150,000 -- we're just taking the numbers with the details they have given us -- that average is to at least

$150,000 for every millionaire, a billionaire in the country. 8 million are and billionaire on average would get $150,000 and some folks would get more. we did some matter of our own. we added up all the investments $150,000 could pay for. this would give me the tax break that i don't want and don't need. i get treated pretty well in this life. [laughter] i will be okay and melia and sasha will be able to go to college. [laughter] michelle is doing fine. [applause] understand what this means -- this is what $150,000 means -- $150,000 is what each millionaire and billionaire will get on average.

this could pay for a tax credit that would make a year of college more affordable for students like you [applause] plus a year's worth of financial aid for students like you [applause] +, a year's worth of prescription drugs savings for one of your grandparents [applause] +, a new computer lab for this school [applause] plus a year of medical care for a veteran in your family who went to war and risked their lives fighting for this country [applause] + a medical research grant for a chronic disease [applause] + a year's salary for a firefighter or police officer. [applause] $150,000 could pay for all of these stains combined. think about that.

let me ask you, what is the better way to make our economy stronger? do we get another $150,000 tax breaks to every millionaire and billionaire in the country? [no] or should make investments in health care and education? [applause] i just want to emphasize again -- i want fobbs to get rich in this country. i think is wonderful and people are successful. that is part of the american dream. it is great that you make a product, you create a service, you do a better than anybody else, that is what our system is all a. about understand, the share of our national income going to the top 1% has climbed to levels we

have not seen since the 1920's. the folks who are benefiting from this are paying taxes at one of the lowest rates in 50 years. you might have heard of this but warren buffett is paying a lower tax rate than his secretary. that is wrong. that is not fair. we've got to choose which direction we want this country to go in. do we want to keep getting those tax directive folks like me who don't need them or give them to warren buffett who definitely does not need them or bill gates. he said i don't need them. or do we want to keep investing in the things that keep our economy growing and keep a secure, that is the choice. [cheers and applause] >> florida, i have told you where i stand.

it is time for members of congress to tell you where they stand. in the next few weeks, we will vote on something we callbuffett rule- if you make more than $1 million per year -- and not saying you have $1 million, use a double your money and you made smart investments and now you've got your nest egg and are preparing for retirement -- i am saying you are bringing in $1 million or more per year, then the rule says you should pay the same percentage of your income in taxes as middle-class families do. [cheers & applause] you should not get special tax breaks. you should not get special loopholes [applause] . if we do that, then it makes it affordable for us to be able to

say for those people to make under $250,000 per year like 98% of american families do, your taxes don't go up. [applause] and we can still make those investments in things like student loans, college, science, infrastructure and all the things that make this country great. this is where you come in and this is what i came to see you. it is nice to be here and the weather is nice and you guys have been a wonderful audience [applause] i learned a bu about therrowing owl so there are all kinds of reasons for me to come here but one of the reasons i can miss because i want you to call your members of congress, i want to direct and the e-mailtwe oret them. tell them don't give tax breaks to folks like me who don't need them. tell them to start investing in the things that will help the economy grow.

tell them if we want to bring down our deficit sensibly, we have to do it in a balanced with a sensible for everyone. remind them who they work for. remind them to do the right thing. [applause] as i look out across this gymnasium, everybody here, from all different backgrounds, from all different parts of the country - each of us is here because somebody somewhere felt responsibility for other people, our parents, our grandparents, are great-grandparent's -- some of them took enormous risks coming to this country with nothing because they wanted to give a better life to their kids and grandkids. [applause]

a lot of them did without so that you could benefit. they were not just thinking about their families. they were thinking about their communities, they were thinking about their country. that is what responsibility means. it means as you have greater and greater opportunity, the scope of you being able to help more people and think about the future expands. you are not just thinking about yourself, you are thinking about your kids, your spouse, your family, your grandkids, your neighborhood, your state, your nation. you are thinking about the future. now it is our turn to be responsible. it is our turn to preserve the american dream for future generations. it is now our turn to rebuild,

to make the investments that will ensure our future, to make sure we've got the most competitive work force on earth, to make sure we've got clean energy that can help clean the planet and help fuel our economy. [applause] it is a. our turn. it is our turn to rebuild our roads and bridges and our airports and airports. it is our turn to make sure that everybody here, every child born in whatever neighborhood, that if they are willing to dream big dreams and put some blood, sweat, and tears in, they can make it. [applause] i know we can do this. i know we can do it because the. view you are here because of you

believe in your future. [applause] you are working hard. some of you are balancing a job or a family on the side. [applause] you have faith and. america you know it is not going to be easy but you don't give up. that is the spirit we need right now. because here in america, we don't. give up [applause] here in america, we look out for. one another here in america, we help each other again. ahead here in america we have a sense of common purpose. in america, we can meet any challenge. here in america, we can seize any moment, we can make this century and other great american's. century thank you, god bless you, god bless the united states of america. . [cheers & applause] ♪ [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012]

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

[applause] ♪ ♪

♪ ♪

♪

♪ [applause] ♪

♪ >> lawmakers return this week after a recess. the senate gavels in and to eastern with a procedural vote on the buffett rule scheduled for 5:30 p.m. the house returns at 2:00 p.m.. members consider a bill to provide small businesses with tax deductions and credits. also, continued work on the

surface transportation and highway bills before recess, both chambers passed a 90-day extension that expires in june. >> on monday, americans for tax preterm president grover norquist told a conference to call for changes to the tax code. he will voice his opposition to president obama's buffett rule, a place to americans earning more than $1 million per year requiring them to pay 30% in taxes. this begins at 1:00 p.m. eastern on c-span2. former president george w. bush said any move to raise taxes would discourage economic growth. echoing the words of house republican leaders, president bush said increasing taxes on high-income earners would hurt job growth. following his remarks, chris christie spoke at this conference hosted by the george w. bush institute.

he talks about efforts to balance the budget and cut taxes in his state. [applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, please welcome the president of the george w. bush foundation. [applause] >> good morning. welcome to the new york historical society. three years ago, president bush came home to texas and started writing his book. he and his wife started the development of the presidential center on the campus of southern methodist university. methodist university. it is designed by -- it will be finished at the end of the year. one year from now and april, we will dedicate the building and the ceremony in dallas and half the building will be given to the federal government to be the permanent home of the george w. bush presidential library and museum. it will be a place where people can study and learn about the

presidency of george w. bush and he and laura's public service. the other half of the building will become the permanent, the george w. bush institute. -- the permanent home of the george w. bush institute. this is a flat form -- platform for the continuing service on issues they are interested in. for the last three years, we have launched a program to eradicate cervical cancer on the continent of africa. we have work to empower women in the middle east to be an agent of change there. we have worked to inspire and document the work of dissidents who are trying to bring freedom to their home countries. today, we launched our continued to launch our economic growth perspective in the four% -- 4% growth area. i would like to recognize a couple of members who have helped bring the institute and the center along. our chairman, board members, and

a couple of people on the panel. smu has been a great partner of ours. ours. at this time, i would like to introduce to you the founding director, a smart man. [applause] >> thank you. this conference was conceived and organized by a senior fellow at the bush institute and director of our 4% growth project. we launched the project year- ago at a major conference in dallas that included four winners of the nobel prize in economics. the project's goal is to research, discover, and promote ways for the u.s. to achieve sustainable, rio 4% growth or about twice the rate that is now

being projected by many economists for the u.s.. we want to change the conversation in america so that it is focused on growth. you will hear from a panel later today, but let me try to channel. channel. this conference has been in the works. this is not going to be a bowring conference. it is, at its core, about competition. people like competition. it is fun. that is why people go to baseball games. tax competition is a reality. the tax debate usually eat nor is competition. many analysts disapprove of it. we do not. we like it. we think it is exciting. we think everybody gains. competition makes the global pie bigger. there is no doubt that better national and state incentives make a bigger slice of the pie

at home. people say economics is the dismal science. it is not. it is actually a happy science. it is the science of choice and at its core, choice is all about human freedom. economics is about the decisions that people make and the incentives that drive them. public policy plays a key role in determining the incentives and tax policy is the most powerful of those public policies. the way its structure can get people to work more or less, to invest more or less, to start more or fewer new firms and expand more or fewer current ones. in europe, people worked a full one-third less than we do. the nobel economists who presented in dallas, and show that the reason is not culture. it is not climate. it is the marginal tax rate.

nations and states that want to wait -- work more and invest more must have more opportunity and prosperity and understand they are in a global and national tax competition. we will see that today. in a way, much of what we will be doing today is looking from results to cause this. if strong growth is the desired end, we ask, who grows? we will look at countries, states, america at different times in history. there are places in time where growth has been particularly strong. we want to know whether tax policies are at the root of that success. in which tax policies. the governors who are here with us today understand the incentives that produce growth. tennessee already has no personal state income tax. that may be the reason that that state has outstripped missouri, which does have a tax, a personal income tax the

governor's of kansas, oklahoma, maine, and new jersey were also here with us today and they are all moving to cut their state's tax rates. they understand the power of incentives and competition. the two panels that follow, we will turn the spotlight on state taxes and what they need to state growth into national growth. the sessions will be followed by a panel on international tax competition and won on the u.s. government record on taxes throughout history and conclusions we can draw from it. next, we break for lunch followed by an address by representative paul ryan. then panels on markets and on the real-life impact of taxes on the people who run businesses. then, we look at what we have learned in the star-studded panel called solutions, what we should do in a practical sense to win the tax competition. we will close with a reception fought -- sponsored by the u.s.

chamber of commerce. i would like to thank the chamber as well as our other sponsors. we are a dallas-based organization. we like being in the heartland of america. what on earth are we doing here in new york? not only is this the white hot center of business and finance in the u.s., it is a city built on global trade, innovation, competition. what better place for this conference than the new york historical sites society confers -- founded with deep roots in the commerce of this city. and, also with deep roots in the commerce of this city, is our next speaker, steve forbes. his grandfather was a journalist who immigrated to new york from scotland. he started a great business magazine that he presided over

for 37 years and passed on to his talented son. today, under steve, "forbis" has a circulation of more than 6 million. he has led the company's transition to the internet age with forbes.com and 25 million visitors. he served under president george h. w. bush as the chairman of international broadcasting and in 1996 in 2000, he saw the republican nomination for president, running on a platform focused on growth, driven by low marginal tax rates. in 2000, he ran third in the new hampshire primary and second in the iowa caucuses. i cannot remember who beat him. [laughter] speaking of happy, which is what we want this conference to be, there is no happier campaigner, no more optimistic campaigner for freedom and growth than steve forbes. [applause]

>> thank you for those very kind words and i would like to thank everyone with the bush institute for making today possible. this meeting could not be more timely. even though i tried to do something in 2000, obviously, that did not work, which is why i am doing the introducing today. [laughter] it is a great honor and we should recall that president bush's two tax cuts, particularly the big one in 2003. many people do not remember that president bush inherited a faltering economy when he came into office. the economy was falling into recession. for some reason, he did not feel the need to remind us of it for seven or zero to zero years. [laughter]

president bush understood that taxes are a price and a burden and not just a means of raising revenue. that is a profound insight. when you lower the tax burden on people doing good things like productive work, risk-taking, success, you get more of those good things. bush also understood that economic numbers represent real people. the purpose of positive pro- growth tax reform is to give people the opportunity to prove a lot in life. this focus on people is a distinguishing characteristic of president bush. we all know president must make decisions that can mean harm and death for people, most obviously are men and women in uniform. president bush never had it stated -- hesitated to make those decisions, and he never

let himself get -- like lincoln, president bush spent time visiting the wounded and their families and does so to this day. what the great historian said about lincoln applies to president bush. he said, lincoln was moved by the wounded and dying man, moved as no one in a place of power can opposed to be. for him, it was impossible to drift into the habitual callousness of this sort of that can be expanded at the will of others. president bush years a fundamental similarity with harry truman. his cold where paul -- cold war policies market break with american tradition, particularly after the isolationism of the 1930. never before has america played

such a consisted an active role in the world as it did under crewmen. in choosing to respond to the mortal threat of soviet expansionism, he had to innovate can navigate with no playbook to go by. he was really operating in the dark. no useful precedents. no wonder the secretary of state entitled his memoirs " president at the creation." so too did president bush faced a situation without precedent, without established principles and rules post 9-11. his memoirs "present at the creation." so, too, did president bush faced a situation without precedent. austin churchill -- winston churchill expected to see nazi paratroopers from the skies. we all expected follow-up attacks on terror after 9/11. a second 9/11 did not happen while george w. bush was in office. leadership counts.

president bush rose to the occasion. one example under scores president bush's ability to rise to the occasion. by 2006, the war in iraq was going very badly. against criticism, president bush forced a fundamental shift in strategy. the change worked. the war in iraq was won when he left office. left office. he was right on the big ones. ladies and salomon, the 43rd president of the united states -- ladies and gentlemen.

>> thank you very much. [applause] thank you very much, steve. overly generous in your comments. i appreciate it. i appreciate you coming and i appreciate our sponsors. want to thank steve and the media and the u.s. chamber. i appreciate our governors being near. pretty cool job. i am looking forward to hearing you. i want to thank my old friend harry kissinger. i appreciate those who serve on our board. i want to thank mark and jim for getting this conference going. [applause]

we're proud to host the conference. it is a part of our mission to enlighten and to achieve results. these are for the supporters per alan to the facility the other day and it is in austin building and a great campus. the architect has done a fantastic job. the gardens are going to be beautiful. i look for to the opening in april of 2013. april of 2013. the bush center is comprised of three parts. one is the library and archives. there will be tens of thousands of boxes of materials and hundreds of millions of e- mails, all stored and sorted so they can be analyzed by historians.

there will be a museum the museum is not going to last if it is about me. the museum will be about principles and have you made decisions. it will be interesting. we have a piece of the world trade center that will remind people of that fateful day. in life, you'll be dealt a hand you don't want to apply. the question is, how do you play it? play it? then there is the institute. there is a daunting feeling. i have decided to stay out of

the limelight. i don't think it is could to undermine the president. i intend to remain involved in areas that i'm interested in. the bush institute is an opportunity to be engaged in public policy in a positive way. the building is not open but the institute is. every day the scholars and directors come to work to advance this mission -- how do we promote freedom? how do we honor traditional values, timeless not use? -- timeless values. our programs are designed with clear goals in mind. clear goals in mind. we want people to note that we are going to achieve concrete results that have an effect on

our country and on the world. to have a prosperous and more free america, we have an education system that works. the bush center is part of reform movement. we're focusing on a key component on educational excellence, how to better recruit and train our nation's principals. we believe that all human life is precious. we have a calling to help save lives in the developing world. i believe we are better people when we serve the admonition -- we will act out that call. we have the pink ribbon, red ribbon campaign diagnose and treat server cancer on the continent of africa.

we're getting after it is measurable results. we believe all freedom is universal. we believe in the concept of the universality of freedom. the universality of freedom. i'm not surprised in the middle east that people to man their god-given rights. we recently announced a freedom archive where dissidents, political prisoners, heroic figures, with their stories will be made available over the internet. i think it is important to record a heroic figures like the apostle paul -- vaclav hovel or the dali lama. it is in our interest to support those who are willing to

take risk for freedom. it sends a signal to those on the front line that the united states hears them. you can go to our website, freedomcollection.org. we believe women will lead the democracy movement in the middle east. we have invited egyptian women to come to the country to see help civil societies developed in our own society and to introduce them to mentors and to send them back home full of confidence that they have support in the united states to take on the tough task of helping democracy advance. one goal is for them to set up a woman's network across egypt,

as they remind the man of egypt that egypt needs a society that is pluralistic, and that democracy yields to peace. we support our patriots and veterans. veterans. we have the military service initiative. you are giving money to these ngo's and you don't know if the money is being well spent or not. it was an interesting experience. it is in giving to have to stop at some stop lights coming over here. i guess i missed that.

i do miss being commander in chief, a lot. the bush institute will give me and laura an opportunity to repay as best as we can our vets. i'm taking a bunch of vets mountain riding. i love to mountain bike ride. i did not like being been on a ride by a one-legged veteran. we believe in free enterprise at the bush institute. we believe our economy can be more robust and provide better opportunities for our citizens. we believe a clear expression of freedom is that the aggregate demand of our citizens

deserve but that which is produced. we believe government is important but we believe that government should trust the people, the collective wisdom of the people. we trust people when it comes to spending their money, and so should the government. much of the political debate is about our balance sheet. that makes sense. the debt to gdt is pretty high. sell the balance sheets, you have to grow the private sector. that private sector growth will yield increase revenues. with fiscal discipline, you can better solve your account deficits and your entitlements. deficits and your entitlements. the bush institute this year is

publishing a book. has to be a staggering thing. they didn't think i could read it much less publish a book. we're publishing a book. 21 experts have provided the content on how to achieve 4% growth in the private sector. we recognize that this is ambitious. most of the experts believe this is doable. i help policymakers take time to read what the experts think. you'll read about cutting wasteful spending or increasing trade, energy policy and pro- growth tax policy. the goals the public sector growth and it would be a short conference, which is raise

taxes. we believe the best policy is that which creates a robust private sector. what does it mean? it means that an understanding of who creates jobs. of who creates jobs. 70% of new jobs in america are created by small business owners. most small businesses pay tax on the individual income tax level. if you raise taxes on the so- called rich, you're raising taxes on the job creators. if the goals private sector growth, recognize that the best

way to create growth is to leave capitol in the treasuries of the job creators. if you raise taxes -- i wish day when i call the bush tax cuts. if there were called some of the bodies tax cuts, less likely they would be raised. if you raise taxes, you're taking money out of the pockets of consumers. all the data about taxes causes capital to stay on the sidelines. sidelines. concern it means the capital -- the fuel for private sector growth will not move. that is what we are here to discuss. i think you'll find it a fascinating day. fascinating day. chris christie has caught the

attention of a lot of people, including texans. we see your enormous personality, your robust defense of freedom, your belief in the individual, and we admire the courageous stance that you take and look forward to hear you today. welcome the governor of new jersey. [applause] >> good morning, everybody. thank you for the invitation to be here today. i'll be proud to say that i was a proud member of the bush administration for seven members -- years. to be governor of new jersey -- it is a demotion. [laughter] that, is more significant for some than for others -- that

and comment. i agree with the president. the most important thing you can do is to try to institute pro-groth policies -- pro- growth policies to increase the pie. in the eight years before i became governor, our state raised taxes and fees at the state level 115 times. in the decade before i became in the decade before i became governor, new jersey had a zero private job growth decade.

in that decade before i became governor, we became the state in america that have the most government workers per were mile interstate. that is an enormous achievement. [laughter] and one that took incredible work. when i came into office in those last few weeks of january, 2010, you would think that the news could not get worse and i was assured that my predecessor, he was leaving me a budget that was on a glide path for the rest of the fiscal year, as he said. we have a different definition

of the term "glide path." if we did not cut $0.2 billion of spending in the next five weeks, new jersey would not meet payroll for the second period in march -- if we did not cut $2.2 billion. cut $2.2 billion. we had to find $2.2 billion in money that we have to sequester, there was being spent across the state in order to meet payroll, not in order to meet a lofty goal like cutting taxes. in order to meet our payroll. if you need any greater example

of what happens to an economy when a state government over taxes, over spends come over boroughs, and over regulates -- overspends, overborrows, and overregulates -- we were unable to meet payroll. i had two choices. i had two choices. the democrats retained help the majorities in both houses of my legislature. i was dealing with a democratic senate president and democratic assembly speaker. we had to stress is on the cuts -- we had two choices on the cuts. we could cut spending through executive order. executive order. for those who of watch me, if

you believe i made the first choice, then you need to leave now. [laughter] we sat in a room over three weeks and we went over all 2400 items of the budget and we cut $2.2 billion from the budget. here's what it was. here's what it was. i came into office and you gave me the problem. you did nothing to fix that. i cut $2.2 billion in spending. i fixed your problem.

thank you very much. see you later. the press descended on the floor. they were calling me all kinds of things. julius caesar. napoleon bonaparte. all those great leaders of the past. [laughter] the next day i was coming into the state house. senate president is a friend. his name is steve. steve is the president of the ironworkers local in new jersey. he is a good guy and we came walking in together. i said, a read all those things you said about me.

you turn around. i will send this problem down the hall. he said, wait a second. no reason to overreact. [laughter] so, we then swiftly within three weeks of that speech, i had to present my fiscal 2011 budget. that had a projected $11 billion deficits, the largest deficit of any state in america. now my democratic friends that now was the time to move in the kill. we'll have a millionaire surcharge. surcharge. people mess this up.

in new jersey, we are had a millionaire's tax. in new jersey, they said the millionaires' tax applied to everyone who made $40,000 a -- $400,000 a year or over. we all aspire to be wealthy. if you're not a millionaire but you like to feel like one, come to new jersey. [laughter] even if you're not a millionaire, will tax you like one. the tax was 9% on everything $400,000 and over. now what they wanted was 10.75.

we had a little discussion, a debate about that. they decided they would pass that tax. and so they did. with great fanfare, he passed the bill in the senate. he called all the cameras. he marched myself down to my office -- marched himself down to my office. you know, everybody has a good mother. she taught me to be polite. i put my coat on and i came out to greet the guests. he handed me the bill. i forgot what it was called. they think that maybe slide it by. by. "i am for that, sure.

where do i sign?" he handed me the bill. mr. governor, here is the bill. wait one second. i want you to sit down for a second. i sat down at a little table and i vetoed it. "here, take it back." this is not where we are going in new jersey anymore. he said, we will be back. i said, we will see. we went ahead and proposed a budget and balanced the budget without any tax increases, that cut spending by 9%. [applause] that one guy started clapping, that was about the only clap i got initially. [laughter] we cut every department in state government, every one of them,

everything was cut. everyone shared in the sacrifice. and so -- they said that budget was dead on arrival. but that is fine. we believe in resurrected life. especially during this easter season. we resurrected that budget. the democratic legislature passed it with 99.8% of the line items exactly how we sent it. it did not increase the cost of their government. you cannot start pro-growth policies until you get your house in order. you have to first step up to the plate and do the difficult things. what do we do next? new jersey has the highest property-taxes in america. as they were passing the budget, at about 2:00 a.m. the day before the constitutional

deadline, i faxed them a little surprise. i called back into session on july 1. we're going to consider a 2% cap on property taxes before we leave for summer vacation. they passed my budget, and then went back to their offices and found that letter and had to come back to work. this place is a strain on a family. they came back to work on july 1st. come back on the 2nd. we're getting closer to the fourth. it was over the weekend. all of a sudden, on the 3rd, spouses from all over new jersey were calling their husbands or wives saying, listen, we are already at the jersey shore. we are waiting for you. the kids are driving me crazy.

give him whatever he wants and get out of there. [laughter] i am still indebted to the husbands and wives of democratic legislators all over new jersey. in the afternoon of july 3, we came to an agreement on a permanent 2% cap on property taxes in new jersey. later in the year, totally reformed the interest arbitration systems that were driving salaries up. put the same cap on arbitration awards. 2%. this was on accountable to the people -- this was un accountable to the people. again, done with a democratic legislature. we had another big problem to fix. the same way that medicare, medicaid, social security are threatening the fiscal health of our country, state pensions and health benefit costs were threatening the health of our state's economy.

in the fall of 2010, we had a $54 billion deficit in our pension fund. and a $67 billion deficit in our health benefit fund. $121 billion combined. that would be four years of the state budget to bring that to balance. i came in september 2010 with a proposal. the public workers in new jersey, they paid nothing for their health insurance. from the day they were hired until the day they died. nothing. on pensions, we had to make significant changes. we proposed increasing the retirement age, eliminating cost of living adjustment until the health of the fund was back at 80% or higher. and end early retirement for -- ending early retirement for

political appointees and political appointees and increasing the penalties for retiring early for anybody. by the way, increase the contributions by public employees to their pensions. you can imagine this went over -- extraordinarily popular. a one to put this proposal out in the first week -- i went to put this proposal out in the first week. the firefighters' convention, right on the boardwalk, 4000 firefighters at 2:00 on a friday afternoon. lunch was not solved that day -- not solid that day. they were fired up and ready to go. they were booing me like crazy. i got up there. governor, i am sorry, the guys are a little bit upset about your proposal. my staff had some talking points. they were booing. i have to do something dramatic. i took the talking points and i threw them away.

it did not work. they booed more. [laughter] i said, let it out. they booed more. finally, i said, you guys can do better than that. and they did. finally, the exhausted themselves. literally. literally. i said, here is all i have to say you. -- to say to you. you know about my proposal. i understand that you are angry and you feel betrayed and lied to. the reason you are angry and feel betrayed is because you have every right to be angry. you have been betrayed and you have been lied to. because governors of both parties for the last 20 years have promised you things they knew they could not pay for. they lied to you to get your votes and you voted for them. now you are angry. i do not blame you. here is the one thing i do not get. why are you booing the first guy that comes in here to tell you

the truth? there is no upside for me coming here and telling you that. i will be done in 2017. there is no political upside. here is what i will tell you. if these reforms get passed, 10 years from now, when you retire, you'll be able to get health benefits for your family, you will be on the internet looking for my home address to send me a thank-you note. somebody found came in here and told to the truth -- body finally came in here and told you the truth. we did 30 town hall meetings across new jersey. this was not just pro-taxpayer. it was pro-new jersey economy, and it was pro-union worker. believe it or not, in june of 2011, with only one-third of the democrats in the senate and one-third of the democrats in the assembly, along with all the republicans, we passed that

pension and benefit reform package, saving $132 billion over the next 30 years for the taxpayers of our state and securing the future of the pension health benefit programs. we did that because my friend was courageous. steve sweeney. he stood up with a minority of his caucus. he sponsored the bill and made sure it got the votes. sheila oliver, an african- american woman from essex county, our most democratic county, stood up, and voted for the bill, posted the bill with only one-third of her caucus supporting her. they said they did it because we are partnering with the governor to do the right thing for the people of our state. i agree with steve, leadership counts. what do we see in new jersey? we are now in a budget situation where we are not

dealing with multibillion-dollar deficits. instead, i was able to propose a budget this year, the first income-tax cut in new jersey in over 15 years. a 10% across-the-board income- tax cut. here is the amazing thing. you expect the democrats would be arguing with me about it. the majority of democrats are saying, we have to cut taxes. they're just arguing with me about how to cut the taxes. you know what that means. we have already won the argument. what matters is we have changed a place like new jersey to understand the very principles that the president was talking about when he stood up here a few minutes ago. if you want to grow jobs in new jersey, you have to leave more money in the hands of the people who create those jobs.

since i have become governor, we have created 75,000 private- sector jobs. new jobs in new jersey. we have cut the public sector. there are fewer public employees today than january of 2001. less government workers than 11 years ago. you have to do both. if you want the private sector to grow, you have to take money out of the public sector. we cannot run deficits at the state levels. all of my fellow governors know that. we have the obligation to make those tough choices. we're trying to set the example for the rest of the country. if you can do it in new jersey, c'mon. sitting up here from tennessee. come on, seriously? [laughter] you know.

i will trade my right arm to be on tennessee and oklahoma. i have more sympathy for maine. a little more, not a lot. if you can do this in new jersey, you can do it anywhere. you can do it in washington, d.c., most importantly. what we need again is some leadership that is not going to take no for an answer. leadership who understands that these things happen in new jersey, not because our ideas are right, but because we have developed relationships with the other side of the aisle that allows them to trust us. that does not happen overnight. day after day after day, you have to sit with your colleagues and convince them of the goodness of your spirit. and of the understanding that

compromise is not a dirty word. as governors, what we know is that there is always a boulevard between compromising your principles and getting everything you want. in new jersey, i abandoned the getting everything you want thing a long time ago. but i refuse to compromise my principles. when they want to build a tunnel through the basement of macy's and stick the new jersey taxpayers with a bill, no matter how much the administration yells and screams, you have to say no. you have to look them right in the eye and say no. you have to be willing to say no to those things that compromise your principles. there is a boulevard between getting everything you want and compromising your principles. it is our job to find a way onto the boulevard.

and to never forget that what we got sent into office to do was to get things done. not to send out press releases, not to just posture. i love all those things. [laughter] but we cannot just do that. at the end of that, you have to find a way to make progress. the 4% solution, 4% growth is not going to be achieved if we do not deal with medicare. it is not going to be achieved if we do not deal with medicaid. if we do not deal with social security. 4% is not going to be achieved unless we can credibly advocate for pro-growth tax policies because we have our fiscal house in order. for all of us who believe that the policies the president advocated and spoke about today are the right policies, we know

that job one is to be credible with the people of our state and the people of our country that we will be responsible stewards of the money they already sent us. i would contend to you that we are still a distance from making that case. governors are making a case on a state-by-state basis. we have a lot more work to do. a lot more work to do. in the end, for the people of my state, they do not always agree with everything i do. they certainly do not always agree with the way i say it. what they notice, i am telling -- but what they know is, i'm telling them the truth as i see it. i am not looking to be loved. i think politicians get themselves into the biggest trouble when they care more about being loved than being respected. that is why we run up these deficits. that is why we cannot say no to anything. we care too much about being loved.

i am loved enough at home. believe me. on occasion. [laughter] that's not what i'm in this for. my mother told me a long time ago, if you have the choice between being loved and being respected, take respected. if you are respected, true love may happen. but love with that respect is always fleeting. she was talking about women. i think it applies to politics. if you get people to respect you, you are willing to say no, but you are also willing to listen, you are willing to stand hard on principles that you have articulated to the public, but willing to compromise when those principles will not be violated, then respect will come. in new jersey i think respect is coming for us because even those who do not agree with me

know that when i look them at the eye and tell them i will do something, i do it. regardless of the political cost. and if i tell them i am not going to do something, i won't. regardless of the political expediency. on the door of my senior staff's offices, the inside of their door, they have reprinted a headline from a new york magazine profile they did on me. you're always worried. the headline on this story was "the answer is no." "the answer is no." they blew that up. when the lobbyists come in and they close the door to have the meeting, they say, turn around. that is from the boss. we start off with the answer being no. and then we can say yes to the right things. to cutting taxes, to lowering

regulation, to empower the people of the state and country to be optimistic again. i have never seen a less optimistic time in my lifetime in this country. people wonder why. i think it is simple. i think it is simple. it is because government is telling them, stop dreaming, stop striving, we will take care of you. we are turning into a paternalistic entitlement society. that will not just to bankrupt us financially, it will bankrupt us morally. because when the american people no longer believe that this is a place where only their willingness to work hard and to act with honor and integrity and ingenuity determines their success in life, we will have a bunch of people sitting on a

couch waiting for the next government check. new jersey moved in that direction. we are moving away from that direction. i would urge all of you, the only way to fix that is by electing strong leaders in every state house across america to set the example and to set a fire underneath washington, d.c., that they will not be able to ignore. everytrying to do that day in new jersey. we know we will be judged. we're comfortable in being judged. we will be judged on the basis of the decisions we have made and the record we have created. i hope we will be one of the flagships in the bush institute 4% growth plan because if we are, it will mean there will be more money, more hope, more aspirations in the hearts of our children and grandchildren than there are today. there are today. that is what will make the 21st

century the second american century. that will allow the united states to export hope and liberty and freedom around the world, not by just saying it, but by living it every day in the way we conduct ourselves in the way we govern ourselves. mr. president, thank you for setting that example. thank you for inspiring a whole new generation of conservative republican leaders who you helped to create. so many of us who sit in the state houses today are products of your leadership, your willingness to give us a chance to make a difference in our country and your administration and now to make a difference in our states and a country and in the world because of the opportunity you gave us. thank you very much. [applause] [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute]

[captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] joe lieberman is retiring. our guests are the republican and democratic senate directors. it is at 6:00 p.m. eastern on c- span. >> hours this of the commission is to work to see to it that human rights remain an essential component of american policy and

that when we are evaluating our foreign policy moves globally and men, human rights can never be the only consideration but has to be a part of the dialogue. >> she is the president and ceo of the but lantos foundation. when we're talking about torture as it relates to the war on terror, or the recent policy with russia and the upcoming issue of whether or not the u.s. congress should pass the accountability act. whether or not we will stay on record saying that human rights matter. the matter in china. the matter in russia. >> more tonight at 8:00. >> tomorrow, grover norquist, head of americans for tax reform, held a conference on the

2012 tax filing deadline. that is live tomorrow at 1:00 p.m. eastern on c-span2. next, paul ryan talks about the u.s. economy. he spoke at the george w. insisted this week. insisted this week. >> please take your seats. before i introduce our next speaker, i just want to remind everyone, during the rest of the day, please make sure you see the books that are for sale by

people like karl rove, john taylor, as well as the 4% solution, the book that president bush alluded to earlier that crown books is publishing, that is really all about what we're talking about today. there is a terrific interactive map that travis brown has fought to put together where you can see where everyone is going when they leave california to go to low tax states. it is my pleasure to introduce our next speaker, who came to the wall street journal in 1980

and is now emerged as probably the most powerful man in america. [laughter] the editor of the wall street journal editorial page. in 2010, he won the prestigious bradley award, which goes to someone who has made a major contribution to the promotion of liberal democracy. paul, take it away. [applause] >> thank you very much, jim, and thank you, ladies and gentlemen. it is so nice to be here with so many friends and contributors to the journal, and my dad,

especially -- and might i add, especially sources. we're really grateful to our sources. i'm really glad to introduce our next speaker, congressman paul ryan. the congressman and i share a frustrated career ambition. had things worked out a little differently, had the almighty been a little more generous in his genetic endowment, both of us would rather have played for the green bay packers. this is what happens when you grow up in wisconsin. with all due respect to president bush, the dallas cowboys are not america's team. if you ever visit congressman ryan's private office on capitol hill, you will not find the usual photographs of him with various foreign dignities. you will find a couple of items

of memorabilia. one is a photograph signed by paul morning, the famous running back of the green bay packers of the days of vince lombardi. this is a man who has the right role models. you also might have heard the paul ryan is a dangerous man. a very dangerous man. now, this must be true because the current president of the united states keeps saying so. [laughter] when i turn on msnbc, and of course i'm there every night, and here paul ryan discussed, i am not sure if i am listening to a news channel or america's most wanted. you may have read that one of america's supposedly leading newspapers, in typically understated style, calls him a cult leader.

a cartoon showed a look-alike throwing a grandmother in a wheelchair off a clef. -- cliff. i have rarely seen him criticize anyone, much less throw anyone off a clef, although it to agree with the critic on one. . paul ryan is dangerous. he is dangerous for the status quo in washington. he is dangerous because he understands the united states cannot continue on its current path of a slow-growing economy but a fast-growing government and still remain prosperous country it has been for two hundred 25 years. he is dangerous because he is willing to say this out loud and in public again and again. and he has proposed concrete and controversial solutions that would help the country

change direction. he has suffered the political consequences for doing so. now, this is not a partisan point. before he died, i was lucky enough to get to know on a personal basis the late democratic senator from new york daniel patrick moynihan. every so often, the great liberal intellectual that he was, would call me from the phone and offers some ideas. i should say as an aside that this is the secret to being the editorial editor of the "wall street journal," get people to call you with good ideas. one of his ideas late in life was that the big institutions of government had to be reformed. he was talking about the tax code, the education system. he had particular interest in the great middle-class entitlements of medicare and social security. he said they were designed for an earlier era. they were becoming unaffordable

as americans demographics changed and they were crowding out other good, liberal purposes for government spending, education, transportation, a safety net for the poor. he told me that the democratic party should reform these programs because they offered them. they had created them and they had an obligation to fix them so they could continue on and the is useful to american society in the 21st century as they had been in the 20th. but he said if the democrats were not prepared to do it, the republicans would have to leave. here comes paul ryan who becomes ranking member in 2007. he decides to actually do something with the job. he writes what he calls the road map to america's future that includes entitlement reform, tax reform and other revolutionary ideas. and he -- i remember he visited

us at the journal around this time and i remember thinking to myself, all of this sounds really promising, that is peanuts? how long does he want to stay -- but is this nuts? how long does he want to stay in congress? the first year he introduced the road map, he had 8 co-sponsors, eight. at the journal, we call that the vast right-wing conspiracy. in 2010, he had 14. in 2011, he had a modified version that passed the house with 235 votes. even more amazing, it won the

support of 40 republican senators. think about that, senators voting for a house budget. the sea is parting. cats and dogs, living together. house republicans in 2010 were biased not to vote for the ryan budget. today those reforms are at the center of the presidential campaign. the various republican candidates have endorsed all or at least substantial parts of the proposal, and no less than president obama, i think it is fair to say, clearly views mr. ryan himself and his ideas as the central challenge to his alternative vision of the american economy and of a larger entitlement state. this is for dangerous ideas can lead you if you believe them. some republicans are saying they would like to see paul ryan debate joe biden as part of the republican ticket.

i am not sure that is a fair fight. [laughter] think about it. i think i would like to see paul ryan versus president obama, assuming the president would take the challenge. if you need a moderator, i would be happy to volunteer. so yes, paul ryan is dangerous. in my view, refreshingly so and at this point in our history, necessarily so. congressman paul ryan. [applause] >> thank you. we do share the same aspiration. to play for the green bay packers although we would not be on the team at the same time. [laughter]

mr. president, thank you. thank you for your leadership. thank you for doing this. thank you reporting of the obvious, which is that we have to come up with a growth strategy. i was looking at your web site. free-market capitalism is the engine of mobility and highway to the american dream. i could not have said it better myself. that is what we have to focus on. what we do to get back on prosperity, to get our train on the right tracks? prosperity is what the american dream is all about. limitless opportunities to make the most of your life. your opportunities come from god and nature, not from government, and you can do what you want to be happy, however you define happy for yourself. my own family history is pretty and remarkable.

the potatoes stopped growing in ireland. my family was in a class based society. they came over with the turn on their backs. they came to boston, worked the railroads until they had enough money scrape together to buy a farm. that ended up being in wisconsin. they were there in the summer and they thought it looked just like ireland, so they bought the farm. then came winter, and they said oh, crap. and they had to make a go of it since then. the idea you could leave these class based societies and come to this country because of the idea of this country, we are the country that is formed not based on geography but based on an idea. and we always have to read- realize that idea. now more than ever, that idea is

being compromised. that idea is on the line. we have a choice in front of us. do we want to get back for growth and prosperity like the 4% solution you are talking about, or are we going to throw in with the rest of the world and go down this austerity path, which is what europe is going towards? austerity means current cuts to benefits for current retirees. it means cranking up your taxes to try to please the bond market vigilantes' which slows down your economy, makes it harder for younger people to get out and have a career and make a life for themselves, overburdening regulations were the central government is picking winners and losers in the marketplace, slow growth, pain and austerity. that is what europe it means the slow growth, pain and austerity. that is what europe is suffering. gets hit -- guess who gets hurt the first and most when you start imposing austerity? is the people who need government the most -- the poor, the elderly and the sec.

those are the ones who get hit first and worst when you have a debt crisis. when you impose austerity on your society because she kept kicking the can down road. what we are experiencing right now is basically decades of politicians from both political parties making promises to voters that they simply could not keep. in europe, those promises are up and they are in austerity mode. hear, for lots of reasons, being the world's reserve currency, we still have time and we still a chance to get this under control, to get back to prosperity and prevent the debt crisis. but our time is not that much greater. our windows starting to close. the next president and congress will make this decision. the reason i say it in such a

stark way as we are reaching to tipping point in this country which arguably europe has crossed. if we reach these tipping point, it will be hard to come back from. the first one is mathematical -- debt. a tipping point of debt which if the bond market turned on us, we are than in of the austerity mode. changing the social contract for people who have retired and organize their lives from these programs, cranking up taxes and slowing down the economy. that our budget is whatever the bond market its telesat has to be. austerity after austerity. that is the fiscal tipping point. tougher tipping point is the moral tipping point where we become more of a taker society verses a maker society. the tipping point where the vast majority of able-bodied americans do not see themselves as the provider for themselves, but the government.

instead of working in reforming to get people off of welfare and on to work, we have turned it into a hammock that allows people to rely on dependency. i don't need to go into all of that -- -- though "wall street journal" they will give you good projections. the other tipping point, we are all -- we are also getting close to that. you can argue we're past that point, but i don't think we are. most americans believe in the american dream. they believe in the a society of growth and upward mobility. we still have that window. we are at the proverbial fork in the road. we have the choice of two futures in front of us. the way we see it as the only

majority of the republican minority in the -- in america, we owe you the honor of making the choice. that is what this fall is going to be about. on one path, we've got the president's path -- a government-centered society on the path of debt and decline. on the other path is what we are proposing -- a path to prosperity and a path to getting us back onto growth fixing these problems and pre-empting a debt crisis. this november, we are asking for the affirmation of the country to give us the permission and obligation to put this in place before it gets out of our control. the choice could not be clearer. you have an opportunity society reclaiming the american idea or a government-centered society. i would argue president bush -- excuse me -- president obama --

he is right there. i would argue president obama is bringing us toward this government-centered society, putting his trust in government. this is a trust that puts us down the path of debt and decline. i have a lot of problems with the president's budget. he submitted a budget each of the four budget seasons, unlike the senate which chose to ignore the budget law. go figure -- you are lucky to represent the people of your district or your state. we have a debt crisis on the horizon, the need to pass the budget to fix that. where i come from, it is a firing offense. but let's talk about the president's budget. there are a lot of problems i have with it but let's focus on growth.

it makes our growth situation worse. i will just quote tim geithner. he said "we are not suggesting we have a solution to long-term fiscal problem. we don't. we just don't like yours. i could not have said it better myself. this is what the president is doing. rather than seeing this clear and present danger to our country, our economic future and our way of life, rather than putting a solution out there, wait for the republicans to put a solution out there and attack it. that is not called leadership. second, certainty -- if you put a budget plan in place that deals with the drivers of our debt to "ben bernanke, that will give us an immediate boost today. the future, the bond market, businesses, they're looking to

see of leadership is being placed in washington to get this situation under control so they can take risks and no they have a certain future that is one to be optimistic about. until you have a plan like this in place, you will not reach that growth dividend. another reason the president's budget is bad for growth -- both parties have been subject to what i call crony capitalism. for us, we got confused. we thought being pro-business was being pro market when in fact was being pro incumbent business and ended up erecting barriers to would-be competitors. it's easy to go back to our core principles, which is being pro- market. it is a little harder for the left to do this. because the president subscribes to the notion that they just know better in washington. congress can pass these vague laws and we have a permanent class of technocrats and bureaucrats who can better

micromanage society and the economy into a better job of subsidizing and picking winners and losers whether to regulations, whether creating bigger banks or the tax code or the regulatory state, they believe in a process which ends up putting entrepreneurial, small business car risk taking capitalism, putting it aside and replacing it with crony capitalism, with big government capitalism. that replaces the rule of law with the rule of bureaucrats and the rule of the connected. that is one of my biggest criticisms of his budget. finally, let me get to the net of the matter -- taxes. tax reform. this is where the president's government is most anti-growth. he is proposing the top effective marginal income tax rate goes to 44.8%.

overseas, lake superior -- that canadians just dropped their business tax to 15%. nine out of 10 businesses in wisconsin file their taxes as individuals. eight out of 10 are not corporations, their businesses that file as individuals like partnerships and llc's. what we are saying to them is if you're successful and you start with five employees and then get to 250 employees, we used to call that the american dream. now you are part of that evil rich. now you will be hit with a 45% tax rate. how on earth are you going to be will to compete with the canadiens taxing themselves at 15% or the japanese who are lower than us or the chinese?

we have got to remember that we are in a global economy and if we tax our job creators, if we tax these businesses where more than half of americans work today, if we tax them at such higher rates than at our foreign competitors are taxing their companies, we lose and they went. this is a system of direct for prosperity the bottom line is we have tried this approach. we have tried chasing higher spending with taxes and more debt. we tried a stimulus spending and all of the demand side stimulus. all it got was a debt hangover and more uncertainty hanging over the economy. it has put us on slow growth. our poverty rates are the

highest in a generation. one of six americans are in poverty. the women unemployment rate is higher than we ever measured it. the good news is there is a better way. the other good news is some of us are putting ideas on the table to show there is a better way. that is what our path to prosperity but it does. ofpaul's point -- a lot pundits told us we were crazy. they said whatever you do, don't do that. you are going to risk political death. i have to tell you that if you want to be good at these jobs, you have to be willing to lose these jobs. if all you do is worried about getting reelected and doing what the pundits and pollsters tell you is the right thing based on the phone calls that took place last bite, you are going to go nowhere. you are going to chase your tails and run in circles.

we know what works -- freedom works. free enterprise works. our budget is a huge contrast. to be really quick, the contrast is this -- we actually deal with the problem. we see the debt crisis coming, we see the drivers of the debt and we deal with it. we have to have those fundamental and structural entitlement reforms. the sooner we act, the better off we are. we have proposals for medicare that does not change the benefits for anyone near retirement. if you wait much longer and have a debt crisis, all bets are off. let's preempt austerity by getting on the right path so those people who retired -- my mom has been on medicare for 11 years. when you turn 65 in wisconsin, you have to go to florida for the winter. we do not need to pull the rug

out from under these people. if we reform these programs now, we can -- we cut $5.3 trillion from the president's budget. we get the debt completely paid off. the second difference is we proposed the end of cronyism. get rid of all the corporate welfare. get rid of the notion we should be subsidizing this company and not that company. get rid of the idea that regulators should be picking favorites among those who are connected. get back to the system of free markets, fair play and people will apply to everyone. equality under the law, not equality after the law. the other big difference is tax reform. we propose to do fundamental tax

reform. of all the things you could do in this country to get people back on the path to prosperity, have to acknowledge the fact that the income tax system blows up in january. i was on the ways and means committee when president bush signed it those tax bills into law in 2001 and 2003. hall all tax bills must originate in the ways and means committee and then goes to the senate. when the bill left the house, it was permanent. it was never intended to be a temporary reduction. have you ever heard of tom daschle? then came the filibuster. in order to get that reduction in place, which the 2003 law was to speed it up to get out of the slow growth recession we had a time, he had no choice but to accept a time limit because the

senate refused to go along with making these things permanent. so we are where we are. we have a cliff coming at the end of the year. it provides a great opportunity. take a page out of steve forbes's playbook and go back with a common, simple system -- a lower the rates, broaden the base. guess what? there are democrats who agree with us. there are a lot of democrats who agree with this idea, take away tax shelters, limit loopholes, lower everyone's tax rates so we can be entrepreneurs and help those small businesses succeed in the global economy. we proposed a 10% bracket and 25% bracket and bring the corporate rate down to 25%. get rid of this clumsy, outdated, anti system and go to

a territorial system. that's simply a system to make sure we don't keep pushing capital away from america and we make america the place you want to keep your capital. make america a place you want your headquarters to be located. 95% of the world's location is not an -- world population is not in this country. if we want to have higher living standards, we have to make and export more things. we need to have tax laws that jive with that. because japan lowered their corporate tax rates, we are the distinguished honorees of having the highest in the world. we think we should let people keep their money and improve incentives to save, work, and invest. you also remove distortions out of the tax code and allow

capital beat -- capital to be deployed where it can create the most value and wealth, now were some bureaucrat thinks about to go. individuals acting in their own and did -- in their own interests and community decide where the money ought to go. you have to keep an eye on competitiveness. if we do not mind the fact that this is a whole new story, the 21st century is not one where the united states is the undisputed superpower of the world. we have to be lean, mean, and competitive. if we keep going down this path where we divide each other and have this idea where we can tax ourselves at double the rates are competitors are taxing theirs, we will have a welfare state and we will be slow growth and it will be economic stagnation. the other benefit -- the other benefit is it helps quite a bit. if these tax increases hit, it

will go down to 1% growth. with an alternative growth scenario, if you get the kind of plan president bush is talking about -- if you get the growth dividend, you will balance the budget so much faster. the secret to success is economic growth along with spending discipline and in taiwan reforms. if we do those three things, we can get america back on the path to prosperity. the idea at the end of the day is this -- we revive the system of the upward mobility. here is what it all comes down to at the end of the day -- we don't like the direction the president is taking the country. we think he is putting the country on a very dangerous path. we believe if we follow this path, it will not and well for anybody because they have a debt crisis.

the people in need government the most at a very vulnerable time and lives are the ones who get hurt the worst. we believe and prosperity and upward mobility. we believe in equality -- we believe in equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome. in order to put these policies in place, we have to ask the country for permission. our commitment is this -- we cannot simply win an election by default, by running against the guy and hopefully winning a - 4. we have to have an affirming alexian. that is why we're putting these ideas out there. we don't look at individuals as if they're stuck in a station in life. when i was working the grill at mcdonald's, when i was waiting tables to pay back my student loans, i never thought of myself as fixed in some class. never occurred to me there was a

limit and the government had to help cope with it. i always saw myself on my ladder of opportunity to make my life whenever i wanted it to be. that is what we do in this country. this is a choice of two futures we have. do we want to get back to prosperity? do we want to be honest about the challenges we have? where the country gives us permission to fix this problem before it gets out of our control? or we keep the commitment to people who have retired and get back to growth? or are we going to succumb to the attack as bets speak to us in the vise of ways and distort the truth about what's happening in this country to divide and distract americans? these are the choices -- i hate to be so stark, but it is just that simple. i would like to thank the people who are here who have done so much to put us on the

right path only to see the inertia of math and the status quo cannot us. we can do this. we can turn this around. if we do this, i have no doubt in my mind we will get this country back on track just like our parents did for us. that is the entire legacy for america. if we get this right and we turn around, i have no doubt for the next generation, they will look back as this time as the moment america regained its greatness. [applause] >> this week marks the anniversary of two deadly school shootings -- virginia tech and columbine. a student at virginia tech university opened fire in 2007 and eight years earlier, on

april 20, 1999, two students killed 12 classmates and a teacher and wounded 23 others at columbine high school in colorado. to mark these strategies, the -- these tragedies, the brady campaign is calling on lawmakers to enact stricter gun control laws. you can watch live coverage here on the c-span beginning at noon eastern. on monday, grover norquist will hold a news conference to call for changes to the tax code. he is expected to voice his opposition to president obama's proposed buffett rule which would apply to americans earning more than $1 million a year, requiring them to pay 30% of their income in taxes. you could watch live coverage at 1:00 eastern on c-span2. >> april 15, 1912 -- nearly 1500 perished on a ship called

unsinkable. >> want the look out bills were sounded, they struck the bells three times which is a warning, saying there is an object head. it does not say what kind of object. the lookout struck the ball and went to a telephone and called down to the officer on the bridge to tell them what it is they saw. when the phone was finally answered, the entire conversation was what do you see? the response was iceberg, right ahead. the response from the officer was thank you. >> that today at 4:00 eastern. >> secretary of state hillary clinton traveled to the naval academy in annapolis, maryland where she spoke to an audience

about u.s. strategy in the asia- pacific. her remarks were part of an annual foreign affairs conference, bringing together students from the u.s. and other countries. she took questions on what it was like in the situation room on the site of some of the block and was killed. >> ladies and gentlemen, please rise for the arrival of the official party. >> please be seated. good evening, brigade and distinguished guests. welcome to those who are joining us for the foreign affairs

conference. tonight, it is my honor to introduce our speaker, the hon. hillary rodham clinton, 67 united states secretary of state. her service has been nothing less than extraordinary. she contributed nearly four decades of public service as an advocate, attorney, first lady, and united states senator prior to being appointed secretary of state. the secretary of state is the chief foreign affairs adviser. she carries out the foreign policy through the state department and foreign services of that yet states. please help me in giving a warm welcome to secretary clinton. [applause] >> thank you very much. thank you for that warm introduction.

thank you, jordan, who will be helping to moderate question that the end of my remarks. vice admiral miller and capt. clark, thank you for the warm welcome you have given me. i also want to recognize longtime friends -- the governor of the great state of maryland, martin o'malley. and i understand we have delegates from the naval academy foreign affairs conference from schools luckily around the world, including some fulbright scholars. let me welcome all of you as well. i just hope they don't make you climb herndon before you leave the academy. [laughter] midshipmen, thank you for taking time away from your studies. [laughter]

you will take just any excuse. sure you would rather beat sleeping. and youngsters, you are still just glad you are not plebes. second class, i'm sure you'd rather be catching up on homework. and firsties you are already looking at putting all of this in your rearview mirror. [applause] to one and all, it's such an honor for me to be here this evening. i am fortunate to know and work

with quite a few graduates of this academy and call quite a few of them my friends, including the former chairman of the joint chiefs, retired admiral mike mullen and harry harris who travels the world with me and this year with me tonight. as i was signing the guest book for the lectures, i know you heard from my former colleague, senator john mccain, who by his own admission was no where near the top of his class, but that did not stop him from becoming a genuine american hero and great colleague and traveling companion during my years in the senate. i received an e-mail from another graduate i know just in the last day who had heard i would be coming here to the academy.

he wanted me to understand how this academy prepares you not just for military service, but for citizenship and life. carlos came to annapolis after fleeing cuba as a child with his parents who both worked two jobs to make a new life in america. the naval training he received help has the first commanding officer of a guided missile destroyer and his study of strategy and diplomacy landed him a job as a white house fellow. that is not all. he used what he learned in electrical engineering classes -- and i know how much you all of those, to start his own small business that now employs 50 people. on academy's emphasis integrity and character lead

this first generation american to get involved in his own community and make a run for local office. in his e-mail to me, he said "my life would not be what it is today if it were not for the united states naval academy. annapolis taught me to always strive in my own small way to make a positive difference in the lives of others that is not only a wonderful sentiment for an individual's life but also for our country and our country's future. you see, we need you to become leaders who can use every tool and every bit of training to make contributions across a wide range of disciplines. the challenges of the 21st century are blurring the lines

between defense, diplomacy, and development -- the three d's of foreign policy. we need officers who can fight wars, negotiate agreements, and provide emergency relief all at once. call it the smart power navy. that is what annapolis is preparing you for and that is what your country is counting on. as we consider this future, let us also remember our past. this is the forestall lecture, named for the first ever secretary of defense, james forrestal. he helped create the modern military and reorganize the

government for the cold war. throughout his career, he championed the the navy as a pillar of america's global leadership. that was not always a popular position. after world war two, many americans would have been happy if we just retreated behind our borders. secretary forrestal was part of an extraordinary generation of leaders who realized that american's interest were inextricably linked to the future of people everywhere. in the 1946, he noted in his diary that the soviets believed that the post-war world should be shaped by a handful of great powers acting alone. the american point of view, he wrote, is that all nations, professing a desire for peace and democracy, should participate.

in the years that followed, the united states and its partners constructive a new international order, and architecture of institutions, norms and alliances that delivered peace and prosperity across what was then called the free world. we saw old rivals like france and germany feeling secure enough to reconcile and stop their cycle of conflict. we watched as increasing integration raised standards of living, as fundamental freedoms became enshrined in international law and as democracy took root and tried. -- and thrived. no tertullian empire today threatens the world but new actors -- no totalitarian empire is today threaten the world a new actors have risen.

emerging regions, especially the asia-pacific, are becoming t -- key drivers of global politics and economics. as a result, the post-war architecture is in need of some renovation. still, amidst all this change, two constants remained -- first, a just, open, and sustainable and international order is still required to promote global peace and prosperity. second, while the geometry of global power may have changed, american leadership is as essential as ever. i have said that the 21st century will be america's specific century just like in previous centuries have been.

and today i want to describe, briefly, the diplomatic and military investments of the united states is making a strong network of institutions and partnerships across the asia-pacific. this vast region, from the indian ocean to the western shores of the americas is home to half of the world's population. several of our most trusted allies, emerging economic powers, like china, india, and indonesia, and the world pose the most dynamic trade and energy routes. surging u.s. exports to the region are helping drive our economic recovery here at home. and future growth depends on reaching further into asia's growing consumer base and

expanding middle class. indeed, the shape of the global economy, the advance of democracy and human rights and our hope for a 21st century less bloody than the 20th century all hinge, to a large degree, on what happens in the asia- pacific. take a look at this month's headlines. it shows the headlines -- it chose the challenges and opportunities the region represents. as we meet here, tonight, north korea is readying a long-range missile launch that will violate u.s. security council resolutions and put its neighbors and region at risk. now, this new threat comes only weeks after north korea agreed to a moratorium on nuclear and missile testing. the speed of the turnaround raises questions about the

seriousness in saying they desire to improve relations with us and its neighbors. this launch will give credence to the view that north korea leaders see improved relations with the outside world as a threat to the existence of their system. and recent history strongly suggests that additional provocations' may follow. we are working around the clock with south korea and the japan to strengthen our alliances and sharpen our deterrent. as president obama said last month after visiting the demilitarized zone, the commitment of united states to the people of the republic of south korea is unshakable. we'll also work with russia and with china. they both share a strong interest in the stability of the korean peninsula and will join

in sending a message to the north korean policy that truth -- to the north koreans that true stability will only come by first and foremost to their own people. yet, at the same time, a meaningful opportunity for economic and political progress. for decades, that southeast asian nation has been locked behind an authoritarian curtain while many other countries in the region made successful transitions to vibrant democracies and open markets. the nine states, supporting these transitions, have been one of our defining efforts in the asia-pacific. from south korea to the philippines, from thailand to indonesia. i am often a little frustrated people forget how hard it was for those four countries to make

their transition. they went through all kinds of military dictatorships and instability. we have to continue to have the patience and persistence but to nurture the flickers of progress that i saw when i visited of burma. the first visit by secretary of state in 50 years. of course, if it is still too early to say how this tour will end, but just nine days ago the long-imprisoned at noble peace prize winner was voted into parliament. much is the history of the 21st century -- much of the history of this river century is being written before our eyes. a quick glance shows that we have day deep stake in how that history plays out.

from our first days in office, the obama administration began directing america's foreign policy to account for the asia- pacific growing importance. i made my first overseas trip there as secretary. president obama has traveled to the western pacific four times. we stepped up our engagement with black call foreign-deployed policy. we're not turning away from our old friends or interests in other parts of the world. our relationships with european and nato allies, who are, after all, our partners, remain indispensable for our work around the globe. we need to deepen our engagement in the asia-pacific region. just as we're not losing old friends, we are not seeking new enemies. today's china is not the soviet

union. we're not on the brink of a new cold war in asia. just look at the ever-expanding trade between our economies. the connections between our people. the ongoing consultations between our governments. in less than 35 years we have gone from being two basis without hardly any ties to speak up to being thoroughly, inescapably inter-dependent. that requires adjustments and thinking on both sides. geopolitics today cannot afford to be a zero sum game. a thriving china is good for america. and a thriving america is good for china, so long as we both thrive in a way that contributes to the regional and global good. let me go one step further. we will only succeed in building a peaceful, prosperous asia-

pacific if we succeed in building an effective u.s.-china relationship. so, our aim is to build a mature and effective ,nstitutions that can mobilize and actions and settle disputes peacefully. it to work towards rules and norms. and established security arrangements that provide stability and build trust. i am well aware that some in asia fear that a robust american presence, and our talk of architecture and institutions and the norm is really code for protecting western prerogatives and denying rising powers their fair share of influence. the argument goes that we are trying to draw them into a rigid

system that favors us. well, that is just not the case. we agree that regional and international architecture cannot remain static. rules and institutions designed for an earlier age may not be suited to today. so, we need to work together to adapt and update them and even to create new institutions where necessary. but there are principles that are universal and thus must be defended. a fundamental freedoms and human dignity. an open, free, transparent and fair economic system. the peaceful resolution of disputes and respect for the territorial integrity of states. these are norms that benefits everyone and help all people and

the nation's trade in peace. the international system, based on these principles, help fuel, not a foil the rise of china and other emerging powers such as india and indonesia. those nations have benefited from the security it provides. from the trust it fosters. as a consequence, they have a real stake in the success of that system. and as their power grows and their ability to contribute increases the world, expectations of them will rise as well. but some of today's emerging powers in asia act as selective stakeholders. picking and choosing when to participate constructively. while that may suit their

interest in the short term, it's man ultimately render the system that has helped them get to where they are today unworkable. that would end up impoverishing everyone. history shows us that a strong, regional architecture can bring to bear incentives for cooperation and problematic behavior is. but this kind of architecture does not just bring up on its own, just as nato and other aspects of the post world war ii architecture did not just happen. it takes consistent effort, strong partnerships, and, crucially, american leadership. that is what our strategy in the asia-pacific is all about. all of our actions, diplomatic, and military are designed to advance as a goal. let me offer three examples about how it works.

first, president obama attended the east asia summit this past november. the east egypt summit is a gathering of the heads of state of all kinds of the nations in the region to grapple with the biggest challenges and pursue a comprehensive solutions, whether it is on a nonprofit station -- non proliferation or security. president obama's decision to participate capped three years of intensive engagement with the southeast asian nation and a pack, the asian pacific corp. and reflected our support for the east-is a summit as the region and's premier of forum for discussing political issues. having an institution like this could make a difference.

some nations have competing claims on its waters. the stakes are very high. dis states has no territorial claims there. we have always been a nation with an abiding interest in protecting the seas and respect international law and promoting the peace resolution of disputes that arise out of navigation. try to settle complex disputes like this bilaterally was a recipe for confusion and, potentially, confrontation. there were too many overlapping claims. some countries are being allocated while others are being

diminished. but when president obama joined his fellow leaders at the east- is a summit, there were able to support a region-wide effort to protect access to the south china sea, work toward developing a code of conduct, and respects the legitimate interests of all claimants to ensure that disputes were settled through a consensual process based on established principles of international law. it was a reminder that for certain issues there are no substitutes for putting the relevant players in the same room and giving them a chance to begin to exchange ideas and work towards a sorting out problems. in cases like this one, smaller countries can be sure their voices are heard and larger countries, which have a significant stake in broader regional stability and security can pursue solutions to these

challenges. here is a second example which demonstrates how strong rules and forms of matter in people's lives. as part of that same trip, the presidents of build momentum for a new trade agreement called the trans pacific partnership that we are negotiating with eight other countries in the asia- pacific region. this agreement is not just about eliminating barriers to trade, although that is crucial for creating jobs here at home. it is also about agreeing on the roles of the road that is open, free, transparent and fair. it will put in place strong protections for workers and environments. all key american values. it will cover emerging issues such as regional supply chains,

the competitive impact of state- owned enterprises and create a trade opportunities for more small and medium-sized businesses. these kinds of rules help level the playing field for all countries and companies. when the rules are transparently known and there are systems to enforce them, american businesses can out compete and out innovate anyone in the world. their only work if there are known and forest college is why this administration continues to bring suits against violators of trade and norms. on the subject of norms and rules, the essays is increasingly concerned about the growing threat to our economic and national security by cyber

intrusions, particularly the theft of intellectual property and classified material via cyber means. because the united states and china are two of the largest global cyber actors, assembling clear practices in that cyberspace is critical. i was delighted to hear from admiral miller that the naval academy is introducing a cyber kors that will -- a cyber course educate you but the challenges in cyberspace and help prepare you for an essential function of our defense. we'll continue to be very candid about this and clear-eyed in addressing the harms and risk that evolved over the past few years. at the state department we are -- we are attacked countless

times every single day. acta, our defenses are not breached, the people decide they want to dump national security material into the public domain. with the figure out how to deal with the human factor while we build up our technical expertise. my third example will be familiar to many of you because it deals with how strong alliances and partnerships, especially our military cooperation with military's around the world saved lives, build trust, and advances our interests. for decades, the united states military and our enduring alliances with japan, south korea, australia, the philippines, and thailand have underwritten security and stability in the asia-pacific. every day, the navy has some 50 ships, hundreds of aircraft,

tens of thousands of sailors and marines in the pacific at any given time. -- role isgrow growing. each year, u.s. navy ships, sailors, and marines participated more than 170 bilateral and multilateral exercises and conduct more than 250 port visits in the region. one of my favorite port visits was of the uss mccain to vietnam. this allows us to respond more quickly and efficiently when we need to work together with partners. such as responding to natural disasters in one of the most vulnerable areas in the world. i hope you know and are proud of the navy's efforts after the earthquake, tsunami, and nuclear

crisis in japan last year. the fleet had developed a close partnership with the japan maritime defense force over many decades. we were able to work hand-in- hand conducting search-and- rescue missions, evacuating the injured, and so much more. after the operation was over, i had a chance to visit with the crew of the destroyer uss fitzgerald. they told me how all of that preparation and partnership had paid off. to maximize our ability to participate in these kinds of efforts and to meet an increasingly diverse set of security challenges, the united states is moving to a more geographically distributed, operational and brazilian, and politically sustainable force posture in the region. we are sending marines to australia for joint training.

the first six-month rotational diplomat arrived in darwin last week. we are deploying state of the art ships in singapore. we are modernizing our arrangements with allies in northeast asia. we're also working hard to reduce the risk of miscalculation or missed cues between american and chinese militaries and to try to forge a durable military-to-military relationship. we are to work together to combat piracy of the horn of africa. we can, we should, and we must deal -- and do more together. we also to establish a dialogue that brings american, and chinese military leaders to the issue like cyber security. here is the bottom line, which, i think is worth remembering as you work, study, and prepare for

your future in the navy and marine corps. extraordinary service and sacrifice of america's men and women in uniform makes a difference in the lives of people all over the world. in this region, it made a difference in the lives of those people in the japanese community rescue from the flood waters. or to the singapore sling -- sea captain protected from pirates. or the korean family shielded from oppression. when it comes to securing stability in the asia-pacific, there is simply no substitutes for american power. only the united states has the global reach, the resources, and the resolve to deter aggression, rally coalition, and project stability into diverse and dynamic areas of the danger, a

threat, and opportunity. it is not 1912 when friction between a decline in britain and a rising germany set the stage for global conflict. it is 2012 and a strong america is welcoming the new powers into an international system designed to prevent global conflict. we have come from a long decade of war, terrorism, and recession. these continue to be difficult days for many of our fellow americans, but america still has the world's largest economy with the most productive workers, the best universities, the most innovative companies. our military is the finest in the history of the world, far outclassing any rival. there is no other nation that can prevent -- project force on

every continent and in every ocean. just as importantly, no other nation can bring desperate countries and people together around common goals. american leadership is respected and required. yes, this is because of our military and material might, but it is more about our values and our commitment to fairness, justice, freedom, and a democracy. our record may not be perfect, but united states consistently, over history, seeks to advance just not our own good, but the greater good. this is part of what makes american leadership so exceptional. there is no real precedent in history for the role we play or the responsibility we have shouldered. and there is no alternative.

but our global leadership is not a birthright. it has been earned by each successive generation, staying true to our values and living up to the best traditions we other nations. in the years ahead, it will be up to you and your classmates. one of my own memories from much of it is listening to my he was a chief petty officer, responsible for training thousands of new recruits at great lakes naval station outside of chicago before they shipped out to sea, mostly to the pacific theater. he never forgot how it felt to watch those young men get loaded onto troop trains heading for the west coast, knowing that many would never return home. he never lost his sense of duty or his belief in our exceptional country.

and after he died, i received letters and photographs from so many of the sailors who he had trained and who had served with him. even all those years later, they shared a deep and abiding faith in our nation and the work we must do in the world. one day soon, you, too, will leave this place and board ships, submarines, and aircraft bound for distant seas. some of you will sail the atlantic, renewing old bonds and defending old friends. others will head to the pacific to face the challenges of a new time. wherever you go, you will represent the pride and power of this great nation we cherish. and you will embody our hopes for a freer, more peaceful, and prosperous world.

but before you head out into that world, i think you need to make some more memories here at home. so with the approval of the superintendent and the commandant, i am pleased to grant an uncharged overnight for plebes and an uncharged weekend for upper class midshipmen. [applause] thank you. thank you for your service to our country. good luck and godspeed. [applause]

>> thank you. we all but of the floor for a few questions. there microphones. the closest microphones are to the left and right here. >> great. ok. where should we start? ok. trebek there. straight ahead. >> russia is providing support for the assad regime while other countries are indirectly supporting steering resistance. we are also trying to improve our relations with the government. how can we best balance these interests? >> i think about that every day.

the me say a few things about syria. you are right that the bashar al-assad regime is being supported primarily by a iran and by russia. as well as iranian proxies' like hezbollah. it is a terrible, violence and to wage in which you are all reading about or seen on the screen. the it has been our effort to try to reach international consensus that has so far been prevented in the security council because primarily, of russia, but also china joining russia to veto or blocked any

action that might have the support of the united nations. kofi annan, who is the joint special envoy of both the united nations and the arab league, reported to the security council today that the spy aside's commitment to abide by the six- point plan that kofi annan presented, he has failed to do so and in fact, the violence is even increase saying. there were two dangerous incidents where syrian military forces fired across borders into both turkey and lebanon on within the last 48 hours. >> i will be meeting with the g- 8 ministers.

we will have another go at trying to persuade the russians that the situation is deteriorating and the likelihood of regional conflicts and civil war is increasing. the challenge in syria is so much more complex than what was phased in libya. in part because of the outside support that the syrian regime is receiving and in part because of the makeup of the population with in syria. you'll notice that the arab league, which actively for the first time ever, called for intervention in libya, has not been able to achieve that level of consensus because of competing concern. we will be working to try to reach some kind of agreement

within the security council. part of the difficulty is of the change in leadership that is occurring in russia. vladimir putin will assume the presidency assume. he is not president yet. it seems that medvedev will be appointed prime minister. he is putting together a government, but not yet. the russians have a long-term relationship with the bashar al- assad family. they sell a lot of arms continuing to do so 02 via bashar al-assad regime. they use a port in syria at that has been made available to them for a number of years. and there are a lot of deep connections between russia that go beyond whoever the leader is

and syria. i think there will be a very rough couple of days in trying to determine whether we go to the security council, seeking action, knowing that russia is still not on board, but continuing to, you know, require them to have to either veto or abstain and see what we can try to bring about, because we are not going to give up. we will keep pushing for both humanitarian and strategic reasons. i spoke last night with the foreign minister of turkey and understandably, the turks are quite upset with the garage of fire coming across their border with the syrian military setting forests along the border on fire to try to flush out opposition fighters. people were killed. in turkish territory.

this situation is only getting more dangerous a and the russians have consistently said they want to avoid civil war. they want to avoid a regional conflict. their refusal to join with us in some kind of constructive action is keeping us side -- assad in power and able to ignore the demands of his own people, of his area in the world. we are going to keep pushing as hard as we can until we get some action that can provide, at the very minimum, humanitarian access and keep pushing a political transition. there is no satisfying immediate answer, but that is part of what diplomacy is. you get up every day and to keep going at it. oftentimes, it is quite frustrating, but there does not

seem to be any other path but that one to follow right now. >> thank you. [applause] >> ok. >> in my french class, we recently discussed the crisis in congo. in 2009, as part of your african -- he visited cairo. could you expand on your experience in the area as well as provide us with insight on where you see the u.s. future involvement in providing humanitarian aid to these areas marked by such genocide? in your opinion, what role can we have in putting an end to this violence? >> thank you for asking about africa can specifically about condo. you know, it is probably the two worst conflicts over the last 20

years in terms of loss of life -- they were in the conflict between sudan and what is now known as south sudan, which, unfortunately, seems to be heating up again. in the conflict in eastern condo. i was in goma in 2009, which is in the center of the ongoing atrocities committed by a marauding militias and on disciplined soldiers, members of either the condoleezza army or congoliese army- or others. it was both a gut-wrenching experience to go to the refugee

camps, the hospital's where survivors, particularly women who had been brutally assaulted are cared for and it was exhilarating because so many of the people who i met with were looking to the future despite what horrors they have personally experienced. the level of violence seems to have receded to some extent. part of the reason for that is that the lord's resistance army, which was one of the marauding bands of -- bands, has moved out of the congo. u.s. would we could do. the president ordered 100 special forces to work with the military's in the area, primarily the ugandan military to go after joseph coney --

joseph koney who has been killing and abusing children and others. our military is working to play its role and then in addition, we have many programs from our international assistance, the agency for international development, usaid. we have many non-governmental organizations, groups who are working to provide support of all kinds. americans are active in the area, but what we tried to do is to work towards a resolution that would take away the incentives for the exploitation of the natural resources, which fuel is a lot of the violence

because there is a lot of money to be made extracting all of those minerals that you find in your cell phone or your laptop. we have passed legislation to require our companies and hopefully to get to the international standard where all companies will have to be transparent about the business that they do in the eastern congo, to try to shut down the road that, illegal operations, which fuel and fund a lot of the militias, to work with the neighboring countries to try to end their using eastern congo as a proxy battleground, you know, after the genocide in rwanda. a lot of the militias fled into the condo. the rwandan government chased them. you had you gone in sioux had all kinds of grievances against

joseph kony. it became a cauldron of militias and proxy's and other kinds of supported and funded violence. we are working at a governmental level in a non-governmental level. we're working on the civilian side and the military side. it is still a dangerous place and it really goes to show how a poorly governed country is unable to protect its own people, to run an economy. to try to offer legitimate tabs to better futures for kurt -- for people. we are trying to build up the government as an institution. i will end with this one story. when i was in the city, i learned that the way of the congo military, which was a tory is for having all of these rogue

commanders and soldiers who would rape and pillage and steel and never be disciplined, how the central government paid their soldiers. they paid them by giving a big load of cash, like a pickup truck filled with cash, which was then either driven or put into a plane or even carried by couriers, going to various military outpost. guess what, by the time it got into its third or fourth day of travel, there was nothing left. a lot of the soldiers were never paid. they were not paid for years and they turned into a terrible, illegal activities to feed themselves and their families. we said, wait a minute, you know, we saw more and more people with cell phones, why do we not try to bring mobile thinking to the democratic republic of congo? -- mobile banking to the democratic republic of congo? we would get the rest -- the

correction out of the hands of the leadership that are stealing from their own men and try to get into bank accounts or into the hands of the soldiers to begin to build up some sense of reliability and discipline of loyalty. these are things that, you know, you do not think about until you actually get into a place and you start analyzing, why is this not working? there is a lot that the u.s. is trying to do in all of these areas, but thank you for raising this question because the bloodiest, most horrible conflict that are still being waged in the world today are in africa. they do not get the attention they need and i am glad we have a new person trying to work with governments to bring about peaceful resolutions to conflict. thank you. >>[applause] >> ok.

>> there is a famous picture of you with the president and other cabinet members. what was going to your mind at that moment? >> it is funny you should ask this question because we talked about that over dinner. may is approaching so it is on our minds. i was a center from new york when we were attacked and one of my goals as a senator and then as the secretary of state was to do everything i could to try to bring obama of -- osama bin laden to justice. when i went to pakistan back in 2009, i said, i cannot believe that there is not anybody in the government who does not know where osama bin laden is. that caused a little bit of a

raucous, but i believed that somebody had to have known where he was. when we got though we did -- when we got the lead about where we thought he was and we began this very small group process to try to work through all of the contingencies and problems that one would face in trying to launch an attack, either by air, missile, or assault, i just kept thinking about all of the people that i had represented and helped as a senator during the years of my time as the representative of new york. i was very committed to doing everything we could to make the right decision about how to

advise the president. the it was an intense, a thorough process that we went through. obviously, the number of people involved was small, but represented the department of defense, both civilian and military leadership. the cia and the intelligence community, the state department, the white house. we did our very best to try to get the president -- get the presidents hour on this assessment -- gives the president our honest assessment. it was his decision, which i fully supported. i believe that we hesitate the risks and that large house was

the haven for all osama bin laden. the decision was made and i will not say anything that is not hardy in the public record, some of you have already seen everything i'm about to say. we did try to plan for every contingency. our special forces, who were given the responsibility, had a lot more experience because of all wars in iraq and afghanistan. because of the many missions that they have had to run over all these years. i remember one of the special forces leaders saying, look, this may sound really exotic and scary to you all, speaking in this situation room, although we have all done something similar to this, you know, helicopter in, take the target, look for who you are after and then get out of there. we have done it a thousand times.

we still went through all of the thinking about ok, what if something goes wrong with the helicopters? likely tragically so when we tried to rescue hostages in iran. everybody was very, very honest in expressing all their concerns. so, eventually, the president made the decision. he looked for a moonless night. there was concern. i think it is understandable as to what the pakistan me's would or would not do. the decision was made. when we gathered, that sunday, it was a pretty intense, stressful time because the people who were actually doing it on the ground were thousands

of miles away. we had good communications, so in the white house, there is a large situation room in the whole protected sort of secret area of in the basement. there are smaller rooms. we were in one of the small rooms when the attack began and we were able to have some to medication, so we were in real time aware of what was happening. i am not sure anybody reached for 45 is -- brief for 45 minutes. the worst part was when one of the key helicopters -- if you remember looking at drawings of what the compound looked like, there was a yard and there was a wall and as the helicopter went in, the tail got stuck and it was not flyable.

that had been planned for, but it was still somewhat, you know, worrisome that this had occurred. and, it took time to come a you know, get the next reserve helicopter in. but, i think you could tell from the -- i was not even aware people were taking pictures. the photographer was. you were just so concentrating on what you could see and could hear. we could see or hear nothing when they went into the house. there were no communication or feedback coming. so, it was during that time that everybody was particularly focused on trying to, you know, just keep calm prepared as to what would happen and then we got the word that they thought they had killed osama bin laden. think about what they had to do

because it was imperative that we take the body. the decision had to be made to blow up the disabled helicopter, which did not complete the work because of the way was positioned. so, the seals had to take the women and children out of the house to get them away from the site of where the disabled helicopter was. we did not want any collateral damage. all of this is happening -- the body is going out, the women and children are coming in, reserve helicopter is on its way, but not there yet. you know, there were a lot of reasons to hold your breath. all of the helicopters finally were up and out and on their way back to afghanistan. then, we had to wait to make sure that the body really was

osama bin laden. you had visual identification, but we needed dna. there was immediate dna and then you had to be absolutely sure and so the second dna test would take longer. i think finally, everybody was comfortable with concluding that yes, you know, he was there and we did get him. they were positive. that is when the president went out. i was saying to a admiral molk -- admiral miller. some of us went to the oval office and walked through the colony into the white house to the east room where he addressed the nation. admiral mullen was there. the president made his televised address. leon panetta was there. he had come over from the cia where he had been during the operation.

we were walking out of the white house and as we got closer to the door to the colonnade, we heard this roar. we had no idea what it was. none of us had slept for a long time. we walked down and we saw these incredible cheers and shouts and all of the students from around the area, mostly from gw, near the white house, but elsewhere, also, had just spontaneously come to the gates of the white house. many of them, like many of you, were children when we were attacked. this had been part of your consciousness for as long as you could remember. so, listening to those cheers, feeling the relief that came from knowing that it was a job very well done and for me, personally, having the sense that for many of those who lost their loved ones, who had been

grievously injured during that attack, knew personally, that they could think about the future. i was very, very pleased. thank you. [applause] >> secretary clinton, on behalf of the naval academy foreign affairs conference, we would like to thank you for your time tonight. he spoke about tradition and we have another tradition here. -- you spoke about tradition and we have another tradition here. [applause] the irony behind a jogging suit is that you may not jog in it. you may wear it. on behalf of the brigade, thank

you again. [applause] brigade and guests, please remain standing. ♪

[captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012]