♪ >> coming up next, interior secretary ken salazar talks about energy policy and response to the first arrest last week related to the 2010 the key gulf oil spill. then, federal reserve chairman ben bernanke gives his quarterly press conference, house budget committee chairman paul ryan talks about the republican budget that passed the house earlier this month. >> where is the national public radio table? you guys are still here. that is good. [laughter] [applause] >> i could not remember where we landed on that. >> later today, the 98 annual

white house correspondents' dinner, with president obama and jimmy kimmel. watch the entire dinner on c- span. you can also find the celebrity guest list, highlights of past dinners that c-span.or/whcd. >> lee fights a masterful delaying action in the campaign, what happens after all of these things >> you still lose. you're pushed back, and what happens? what kind of operation happens? a siege. >> this weekend, lee and grant,

and their american way of war on american history television. >> morning north korean war camp, it is the only world he had ever known. he is also the only one to ever escaped from camp 14. >> his first memory at the age of four was going to his -- with his mom to a place near where he grew up in the camp to watch someone gets shot, and shooting, public executions in the camp were held every few weeks, and they were away to punish people that violated camp rules, and of terrorizing the 20,000-to-40,000 people who lived in the camp to obey the rules from then on. >> sunday, author blaine harden of and -- on the journey out of

north korea. may 6, look for our interview with robert caro, coinciding with the fourth volume the career of lyndon johnson. >> interior secretary ken salazar said the administration remains to holding all those deemed responsible for the bp gulf oil spill criminally irresponsible. secretary ken salazar is a featured speaker at the national press club luncheon series, and also discussed energy independence, i guess prices, and renewable energy. this is one hour.

>> few people understand or have a greater inspiration for land and a farmer. then make their living from the land and they know the effect of mother nature and father industry. ken salazar is from 5 generation of farmers. he was born and raised in colorado with no electricity and no telephone. the focus was on hard work and an appreciation for the land. after a stint in the seminary, he wound up going to college. getting a law degree am being asked to work as a legal counsel for the governor. he said that i will do it for one year because i do not want to be in politics. as the story goes, his political career was mapped out by a mentor on a napkin in the room of a tamale shop. he served as attorney general, u.s. senator, and now secretary of the interior where oversees public lands including the fish and wildlife service, the land

management, u.s. geological survey, and offshore drilling. his biggest challenge is finding the balance between preserving natural resources and using them to create energy. at the beginning of the administration, salazar was part of what some dubbed the green dream team. he said public lands were no longer a candy store and we cannot drill our way to energy independence. after more than three years, he has learned that keeping a lid on the candy jar, and responding to natural and man- made events is no small task. when the ndp deepwater verizon exploded two years ago, and 53 gallons of oilspilled into the gulf every day, environmentalists criticized interior department and even the president said the cleanup was too slow. gas prices topped four dollars

a gallon in some places and the obama administration is under pressure to boost production. interior department announced a plan to streamline permits for land-based trilling and last week salazar moved a step closer to allow surveys off of the atlantic coast to determine what oil and gas resources exist in that area. when he appeared with president obama to accept the nomination, he created a buzz by wearing a cowboy hat at the white house. even after all of these years, he wears his stetson so frequently that almost every prayer for a piece makes an mention. this introduction without the complete without saying something. even though you did not wear it today, because we are indoors, welcome to the national press club. [applause] >> thank you very much for that

kind introduction. and for irving president, i understand it is also a political place where you have to run for office. she defeated her opponents. did she is no stranger to politics. thank you for being a part of this and been the chair of the speaker's committee and to debra, thank you for helping put this event together. all of the tables, to members of our team who are here and people i have worked with for a long time. i remember him covering the senate race. today, in my honor, and he wore a shirt -- so, let me thank you all for being here today. i want to speak about energy issues that are important to our nation and which all of you

are working on today. it seems that the conventional wisdom says that our nation is divided over and digitalis' seat. i do not have to tell you that. -- energy policy. i do not have to tell you that. almost every day you have someone putting out a three. plan for $2 gasoline. " claiming that there is a secret agenda out there to shut down energy production. the reality is that a americans agree on energy. if you can get beyond washington, and you talk to people directly, you hear the same things that i hear over and over. about what our challenges are and how we must tackle them. americans know what they want. they want to cut our reliance

on imported oil. they know a lot of factors affect gas prices, including world markets and that there is no silver bullet in the near term. americans also agree we need to broaden our energy portfolio. they support conventional energy but in state after state across the country, we have seen the states moving to vote in more solar, more wind, and more of biofuel production into the mix. americans want to see continued expansion of offshore drilling but they also believe that you need to choose the right places for that to take place and you need to enforce safety standards to protect people and the environment. people see stronger fuel economy

standards for vehicles that as a good thing. the proof is in the cars they are buying. for the first time ever, and gm sold more vehicles than they had never sold there are for -- that are fuel-efficient vehicles. 100,000 cars that can make more than 30 miles to a gallon. that is a remarkable achievement. 40% of gm's monthly sales are in fuel-efficient vehicles. who would have imagined that five years ago? there is also home this imagined anergy world, may be a world of a fairy tale and falsehoods that we see here in washington, d.c. it is in that imaginary world where we see that continuing and growing divide in the energy debate in america.

the divide is not among ordinary americans. it is between some people in washington, d.c. it is between the real world and be imagined, carried to a world -- fairy tale world. it is an invention of political rhetoric. it is a place where you hear cries of drill, a drug, antril, notwithstanding the fact that -- drill, drill, drill, notwithstanding the fact that much is open for business. and lance are sitting idle. a 50 million acres. it is a place where up is seen as down, where leftists seen as right, -- left is seen as right, where oil shale is mistaken for shale oil.

record profits and justify billion dollars in subsidies. and where rising u.s. production and our falling dependence on foreign oil somehow add up to bad news. one member of congress went is so far as to say the jobs from solar, wind, and biofuels are somehow phony. that if technology is new, it somehow is not real. president obama got it right when he pointed out that if these folks had been in charge when columbus set sail, and they would have been the charter members of the flat earth society. the good news is that he

imagined energy world is actually very small. i think you can find its edge when you walk out of the house of representatives. that is the end. for those of us to spend our time in the real energy world, let's talk about the reality we work on every day with this great team at its interior and my other colleagues in the white house. without question, we face serious energy challenges in this country. we know that today and we have known it for a long time. gas prices are taking on a real toll and creating pain on family budgets. our economy is still vulnerable to the ups and downs of world oil markets, as they have been for the 12 oil spikes we have

seen since the formation of opec. but because so many americans, including industry, and environmental organizations, but especially the american people are results oriented, and all of the above energy approach is the right approach. our nation has made remarkable progress over the last three years. industry, government, investors, science, stakeholders, all deserve credit. on the broadest to scale, u.s. gas production is at an all- time high. gas production is at an all-time high. and oil production is at an eight-year high. total oil production from the lands which we oversee have increased 13% over the first

three years of this ministration. that is compared to the last three years of the prior administration. now, something i worked on for a long time was to get rid of our dependence on foreign oil. so we in the heartland and the rockies are proud of the fact that oil imports have gone down every single year since president obama took office. thanks to the booming oil and gas production, and more efficient cars and trucks, and a world-class refining sector that last year was an exporter for the first time in 60 years, we cut net imports by 10%. that is a million barrels a day

in the last year alone. imagine that. a million barrels a day less being imported into the united states of america. line up those million barrels on the interstate or warehouses. that is a lot of oil. a million barrels a day in the last year alone. we all know oil and gas is a part of our energy portfolio. we have embraced it and it will continue to be. but we also know that renewable energy and the new energy frontier is something that is important for the people of america. renewable energy production has doubled over the last three years. on public lands, and we are on our way to meeting the president's: permitting 10,000

megawatts of large-scale renewable energy by the end of the year. it will power millions of american homes through that effort that the people at blm have worked on of the last three years. all of these trends show they are gathering strength. they also reflect the practical problem solving mind-set we are bringing to bear at car -- all levels of our decision making. when president obama asked me to run the department, he sent me here to fix problems and help us find solutions for the long term on problems that had escaped from people who had been in my position and had served in the past. let me give you three examples that illustrate the problem- solving approach to energy that

i believe is the hallmark of this administration. first, and the story is well- known to all of you because you worked on this matter, let's look on offshore oil and gas and safety. jennifer, you know the details of what has been going on. deepwater horizon shook the confidence of a americans and offshore energy development. you remember 50,000 barrels a day spewing out endlessly into the gulf of mexico. witnessing that oil spill at that level for 87 days could have prompted the public to say, no more. no mas. that is it.

it is too dangerous. but we knew that oil and gas was an important part of our economy. we had to move quickly to strengthen safety standards and environmental protections. we had to ensure that companies drilling below the surface of the ocean are prepared to drill safety at those depths under the seat. we had to make sure they were prepared to deal with another blowout. we had to take an organization that had been created long before and de-conflict those missions into strong again separate agencies, which have

become world class agencies in the work that they do. the industry, for its part, also had to answer our call to raise the bar. drilling activities in the gulf for back to pre-spill levels. the u.s.'s position as a global leader in oil and gas safety. that is true when i visit brazil or as we host in norway this june. it has been good but the bar has been raised. that is good for domestic production in america's oceans, and it is also good for the industry as a whole. at the end of the day, it is good for american energy security.

our approach does not stop in the oceans of america are we see hundreds of millions of acres. it also goes to the onshore areas where we have oversight of 700 million acres of the lands that belong to the american people. we have moved to on a reform agenda. you can see the benefits of our results. when we took office, the leasing program was in disarray. imagine s -- nearly half of all leases on public lands were protested, put into the framework of endless litigation. projects with thousands of wells were stuck because they could not move forward.

at the end of 2008, the previous a ministration offered some areas near arches national park where i was looking at a commercial from the state of utah. they were advertising the wonders of utah. arches national park. that program had become so highly divisive and controversial. when we moved in we said we're going to move forward with production. we also said we would restore to reduce conflicts on our public lands. reforms have helped bring the public into the leasing process earlier. so that fewer leases and up in court and litigation.

we work to resolve the controversy is on some of the largest projects in the western, including more than 3500 new wells in one state. 3500 gas wells that will move forward because we are fixing problems. in another part of the world, an effort led by the deputy secretary of interior, the united states government under president obama's direction is coordinating its energy permitting activities in alaska. it is to a good result. we are working to deploy a new system for processing permits a on blm lands. we expect to reduce and

permitting times by two-thirds. there is a common theme in all of this, tackling a problem head on, getting it done right, and moving on to the next challenge because we know there are other challenges ahead. offshore ocean energy development in the united states. onshore and the many reforms we have brought. the last area, where we have spent a significant amount of time, in a tour of renewable energy world. in 2009, when i first came to the department of the interior, not a single solar energy project had been approved for construction on the public lands of the american people. offshore, it had been a disaster from day one.

languishing for eight years in a process that seem to have no end. since 2009, we moved in a new direction, it achieving results. we have authorized a 29 geothermal projects on lands. i have been there and seen these projects rising out of the desert. they will make believers out of the skeptics. when these are built, it will provide over 6,500 megawatts of queen power. 2.3 million american homes and thousands of jobs as we grasped the new energy frontier. we have also approved it at the department of the interior and what we have done on the atlantic and in places on the

pacific, working with the governors of those states, we have built an offshore wind leasing program for the united states. none of this would have happened if not for the people we have deployed to help make sure government reviews aren't done in a timely basis. i am proud of what we have done on this frontier and a believe it will be a lasting legacy for the american people. i begin my remarks by suggesting there was a widening gap between the real energy world that i work on every day, which we have made so much progress a, and the imagined, fairy tale world of the falsehoods of a campaign year.

i want to be realistic about what we can expect from this house of representatives but i believe there are some things they can work on. some low hanging fruit that could be passed even this year. they should put the energy security of the united states ahead of politics of the time. i will mention three items. there could be many more they could work on to help us get to this and future. the first, congress should move immediately to codify the reforms we have implemented since the deepwater horizon disaster. it is an excusable congress has yet to enact one piece of legislation to make in drilling safer. for the american people, for all of you, for those of us who

lived through that crisis, it would seem to be a clarion call to action. what should we do as the united states of america to make offshore drilling more safe? my early days india administration, the testimony before the natural resources committee, they said ocean energy is such an important part of the portfolio that we should have organic legislation that codifies what the agency does on behalf of the american people. it was not done then and even since the deep water rising, it has not been done. liability caps have been in place for such a long time. $75 million, still the same

today as they were before the deepwater spill. some people may have amnesia about the deepwater horizon crisis. i do not wanted. i do not believe the american people have it. i believe that the american people want to the united states house of representatives to act on responsible legislation. one of those aspects of responsible legislation would be to codify the reforms we have implemented in the executive branch. number two, i am not trying to give a laundry list of 100 things. i am not sure they could get it done. codification of much of what we have done and some liability reforms we have proposed. they should be able to get that done in 48 hours. there is another thing they

could do. we are working with the congress on legislation to implement an agreement we reached with mexico to open the oil and gas reservoir for development. it would terminate a moratorium on drilling along our maritime boundary and provide a framework for new exploration the size of delaware. we estimate it " contained 172 million barrels of oil and 300 four billion cubic feet of natural gas. that agreement came about as a result of some hard work between people in the department of interior and the state department and the mexican government. it culminated in a signing attended by the president of mexico at the g-20 meeting recently.

it was signed by secretary clinton. while some people say mexico move slow, in this case, the mexican legislature is already approving the agreement. we should not have to wait. congress should act on approval of that agreement through implementing legislation. it will be good for the energy security of the united states and it would be good for the entire gulf of mexico because it is only one pond. it is shared between the united states and mexico. it is a place where we know we have the largest proven reserves of oil and gas in our country. those are two things that the

congress could do, codify what we have already done, approved an agreement we worked on very hard in the gulf of mexico. maybe they want to do some other things. i believe that americans want to see congress implemented policy that makes for a long- term sustainable, renewable energy economy. that includes making tax credits for renewable energy generation and refundable. so there is financial certainty and we do not face the boom and bust that many of us witness in the 1970's with solar power. we need a clean energy standard. we are moving forward with our own but it would be good if the congress were to pass a standard that would provide a signal to investors that they

need. if it were given, there would be billions of dollars on capital that would move to the new energy frontier. is that likely congress will rise to the occasion this year? that they can do those three things? we had the bipartisan effort so we could get some legislation. i would hope so. i would hope that the congress can see that the needs of the american people are first and foremost as opposed to the politics of the day. i think those who stand in the way of solutions are going to find the ground shifting under their feet. the energy world is changing. with or without them. whether it is our oil and gas technology, our power plants,

the pace of innovation is staggering. the united states is determined to leave the new energy world. the president is determined to make sure the united states leads this world for the united states. it is no longer a question of whether you support renewable energy or conventional energy or the environment or you favor the economy -- the american people have already decided to take an all of the above approach. it is what we have been implementing and will continue under president obama. if there is a choice to be made, it is whether you are going to be a part of the bright and promising future or whether the politics of the moment are going to see us have a repetition of what we have seen

the failed energy policies of past decades. many will remember the formation of opec and richard nixon calling upon the nation to move toward energy independence. you will remember jimmy carter talking about moving forward with a the moral imperative war as we look for energy independence. you'll remember the national energy lab in golden, colorado. and everyone should remember though oil and gas price shocks we have seen since the 1970's. every time they come around, it is the same bond per sticker on solutions. we are not into that business

of a bumper sticker solutions. we are in the business of real solutions. with the work we have done of the last three years and three months, we have laid a solid foundation for america to get to an energy security that is worthy of the people of this great country. thank you very much. [applause] >> is there any compromise possible between the republicans and democrats on energy policy? >> i think that there is always that possibility. i was a member of the united states senate. i have friends on the

democratic side and the republican side. i have friends in the house of representatives of both sides. i remember being part of the coalition that put together the 2005 energy act. i remember the great work of the senator working with pete. we did some great things together. the polarization we have seen now in the united states congress, especially in the house, is troublesome. i think their view of justice same -- just saying no is wrong. they should be saying we have challenges in america. gas prices and the oil and gas future are important and there are a number of things we can do. instead of spending their time

politicking in trying to get an upper hand in an imagined world, and they should work on real solutions. >> what you say to critics who say the u.s. is not issuing permits quickly enough? >> i think you will find critics that will make those false charges against this administration but 15,500 permits have been processed through the land management just the last few years. we have lived through a national crisis. we have issued over 100 permits to drill in the gulf of mexico. the gulf is back. those critics do not know what the facts are. it is another example of the

falsehoods better being spread in this political season. i was with a couple of senators. as we looked at what is happening and the development of oil and gas, we looked at it as having as much oil that we now find in saudi arabia. i was there three years ago. senator conrad took me to the reservation and said we have a problem. the government is not working. permits are not issued. there is no development taking place in this reservation. we set up a permit process to try to break through the bureaucracy that was not working. today, when you go to the reservation, 200 permits have been granted.

oil and gas is everywhere. in indian country, where there are millions and millions of acres of potential development, the oil development and production on indian land has doubled, doubled, in the last three years. for those who say we are not issuing permits, there are simply wrong. >> how has the obama administration improved oil administration? is that lowering gas prices for families? >> on the oil and gas production, we are producing more oil than at any time since 2003 here in the united states. those are the facts. more gas is being produced in the united states than at any time in our history. when one looks at the question

of production from public lands, or we have critics who say we're not doing enough, we're producing 13% more oil off of our public land than three years ago. we we're doing as much as can to make sure we are implementing the all of the above energy strategy. at the end of the day, we know we cannot drill our way to energy independence. those who have tried that approach in the past are responsible for the failed energy security policies of the united states in the last four years. they have not taken the kind of approach that president obama and we are taking, which is an all of the above approach, knowing we need all of the sources of energy to power the american economy.

>> gasoline exports are up, squeezing supply. shouldn't american oil serve americans first? >> american oil is serving americans first because the oil we are producing is what we are using to power our economy from the gulf of mexico along. about 30% of all of the oil and natural gas to reproduce in the united states comes from the gulf of mexico and it is consumed in the united states. the energy we are creating in the united states is partly responsible for the fact that last year we imported less than a million barrels a day than we had in the prior year. a million barrels a day. the energy that is being produced is being used in the united states. on the issue of gas prices, as everybody knows, it is determined through global

economics. no one has the ability. not even harry potter to wave a magic wand and say we're going to have gas prices at $2 or $3. it does not work that way. that is the point that i hope most americans understand. there is no silver bullet. there is no magic wand. if we are going to find our way to addressing one of the most important questions of the security of the united states, you need to have a framework and policy in place like the one that president obama and his team had put into place. that is an all of the above strategy that, yes, understand orland gas as part of the enzi feature, and renewable like solar, wind, geothermal, an opening in a chapter that had

been closed for such a long time on nuclear. bio refineries, we have the first four of the commercial ones that we will see advanced biofuels. but it is and all of the above energy strategy. that is what we need to do, stay the course and order to get us to place where the american people are not subjected to the pain of the ups and downs that we have seen in the united states for the last four years. >> our gas prices out of control? will they ever received? someone here said they visited greece and it was at $9 a gallon. are we headed in that direction? >> you know, we cannot control the price of oil. i checked the price of oil every day because i care. it is a painful time for the american people. i don't think anyone can

speculate what can happen with respect to oil and gas prices because they are set on the global economy. what we see happening today are the influencing -- influences first of unrest in places like the middle east and iran, which disrupt the markets and allow the futures market to play on what they see -- the on reston romney world. secondly, the huge demand that you see in china, india, and brazil where you have a lot of people -- just like people in the ninth states, they want to be able to drive their vehicle. so, the unsettled nature of the middle east and what is happening with respect to the global economy really is what has led to the price hikes that we have seen here today. so, where it will all end, nobody knows. but what i do know is this --

that the fall of the above energy framework is what we need to stay the course, in order for us to be able to avoid the kinds of appeals that we have seen since the formation of opec, since gulf war one and two and so many events that transpired really since the 1970's. >> i am told this is breaking news -- the justice department makes its first reston the bp oil's bill. a bp engineer. do you expect more to be brought to justice? >> breaking news. i have been up here with you. let me just say the united states has been committed from day one to make sure we are holding bp and others accountable for what happened in the gulf of mexico. the justice department obviously is involved in the criminal part. we are involved with the civil and, with the justice department as well.

what i can assure the people of this country that attorney general hold their and our teams that have been working on making sure bp and other companies are held accountable will in fact be held accountable. there are laws and regulations that are on the books. it that are reports have shown, including the joint investigation between our department and homeland security -- there were a number of laws and regulations that were in fact broken. so people, and companies, will be held accountable. >> bp had at least three criminal felony convictions for safety and environmental crimes and are facing more for the 2010 gulf oil spill, but yet it come -- you allow the company to drill in the u.s. waters. should there be a three strikes and you're out law for companies like there is for individuals?

>> our approach is to hold companies accountable, making sure that they are meeting the standards that we have imposed. if you looked at what happens in the oil and gas world, especially depot -- deeper waters, we have a approach based on a three-legged stool. first, prevention. nobody wants to see blowout like we saw before. the second is containment. if something like the mcconnell though well below what would happen again, -- macondo well below what happens again, that it can be contained. third -- response. if you have an oil spill, we want to make sure we have the ability to respond effectively. so, working with industry and companies that have now been formed, we have made huge progress in terms of preparedness on oil spill response as well as containment, led largely by our

agencies and the ocean energy advisory committee. we are moving forward to make sure that we have good laws that can be followed and we will keep people accountable for them. with respect to the question on bp, our expectation is bp will be held accountable for what it has done in the past. in the future, bp will be held accountable for meeting standards, the rules, and the permitting process of the department of the interior. >> what would you do differently if there was another oil spill? >> we would move with the same sense of urgency. production -- in our oceans at depths of 5000 or 10,000 feet are not risk-free. there was always a risk.

but the components of the plan we put in place i think would give us an ability to respond very quickly because now you have, for example, contained in caps that are readily available that can come in and can be used to stop a well -- and out of control one. we are much better prepared today than we were before. part of our effort also has been to try to make sure the lessons we have learned here are lessons that the rest of the world can also look at and hopefully follow because the oil and gas world is a global industry. so what is happening today in brazil, what other countries are doing in the arctic circle, what is happening off shore in nigeria and other places around africa -- there are huge reserves of oil in deep water.

it is important that the deep -- standards and efforts we have underway in the united states are also learned by other nations. we have worked to make sure that we are engaged in the international world to assure that of the kind of disaster that the bp oil spill brought to the station is not the kind of disaster we will see again. >> since the deepwater horizon disaster, are you being more strict in denying drilling permits based on safety and environmental concerns? >> yes, we have new sets of regulations that have been put into place. permit reviews are rigorous. we make sure that any company that is going to be operating in the waters of the united states is complying with the rules that we set out. so, we are in a much better place today than we were before

the macondo well blowup. >> how confident are you that show that a judicial's plan in arctic waters will go through since the plan has been approved? >> we are still in the process of moving forward with the evaluation of application to drill shell in two of the sezs in the arctic. we will make those decisions soon and in a timely manner. if the decision is made not to move forward, it would be because of the fact that we don't find compliance with the requirements that we imposed at the department of interior. the bureau of safety environmental enforcement. and energy management -- two agencies which i created. on the other hand, -- moving forward with the exploration of

those arctic seas, it will be done under the most cautious and watched for exploration program in the history of the world. we need to recognize we have already seen close to 30 exploratory wells drilled into the seas. in my view, if we move forward, part of what will happen is we will be gathering additional information about the arctic seas and then we as of the american public and make the decisions on how to best move forward. >> senator david they're blocked a pay raise for you because he said you were not approving enough water drilling permits -- do you believe this is attempts at extortion? [laughter]

>> you know, senator vitter and i came into the senate at the same time in 2004. i don't know what his motives are. but i can just say to anybody want watched that debate that i don't do this job because of the money i get paid. i do this job because it is singularly the best job in the united states of america on this cabinet. and i enjoy fixing problems for the american people. and we have made tremendous private -- progress the last years and that is what i focus on every day. >> the interior department has been promising new regulations for hydraulic fracturing of public lands for months but the rules have yet to materialize. what is the correct status for these regulations and how -- why has it taken so long for them to be released? >> natural gas is a very important component of america's energy future. the president has endorsed

natural-gas even in the campaign of 2008. he spoke about the importance of trying to move forward with the alaska natural gas pipeline in meetings we had early on with the administration. so we are strong believers of the future of natural gas and the way it powers our economy. we know and believe we have an american supply that is not as expensive as oil today which can power the economy of the united states for the next 100 years. we will move forward and continue to cheerlead and push forward for a robust natural gas agenda for the united states. at the same time, as we move forward for the natural gas agenda in the u.s., it is important people understand that unless we do it safely and responsibly, we could essentially create the achilles heel of this great promise of the united states in terms of domestic energy supply.

common sense rules -- and they are very common sense -- are the rules that there have been hearings all over the country on, there have been tribal consultations and there will beat disclosure, so people know what is being injected in the underground. it will be involving integrity so there is no contamination of water quality for drinking water supplies. it will involve making sure the water -- the back water, that there are monitoring requirements. the fidelity of the rules have not yet been achieved. we are in the process of working on the final details. but we are not the only ones who have been involved in making sure that hydraulic fracturing is one that can be done in a safe way and has the support of the potentially affected public.

if you look at the state of colorado, we now have a new set of rules that require disclosure. if you look at the state of wyoming, the republican governor of wyoming, moving forward with a common sense of hydraulic fracturing rules. so, we will move forward with common set of rules once we complete the refinement of those rules, which the director and assistant secretary and others have been working on. >> we are almost out of time, but before asking the last couple of questions we have a couple of housekeeping matters to take care of. first, i would like to remind you of upcoming lunch speakers -- mike rizzo, general manager of washington nationals, may 30, -- chief executive officer of girl scouts of usa talking about 100 anniversary of girl scout income and june 4, the gerald r. ford journalism awards

with chris matthews will be here at our club. second, i would like to present our best with our traditional npc mug. [applause] and a couple of quick last questions. do you know when the washington monument will reopen for visitors? [laughter] >> we are working on a very hard. i think it will be maybe a year or so out by the time the construction takes place. >> since he once said he didn't want to be in politics, do you sometimes wish you did not go beyond that one year? >> i think my family might have the opinion that i would of been home more than i am if i hadn't gotten into the public world. i will say this -- at the end of the day now -- i could speak with allison and debbie and

teresa -- the fact is that we have so much to celebrate in what the united states stands for in the world and what we stand for here in our own country. i was just back home celebrating my brothers and 90th -- mother's 90th birthday, she had a tough tenor 12 years. and she had a smile on her face. i think back of her generation and how wonderful the work. at the age of 19 she found a way to get on the train to work here in washington at the war department for years, my father served as a staff sergeant in the war and he made sure we buried him in his uniform in world war ii because he was so optimistic about what this country could do. so, i think in these times of great vision and polarization of our world, that we ought art -- ought to hearken back to that generation that did so much and gave us the opportunity to become really the weekend and hope of opportunity for all of

america, all of humanity. the begin end of the hope of opportunity for all america. that is so much of what hangs in the balance today. as we deal with people who want to deal with the imaginary world and those of us in the trenches trying to make the world better place. my answer to the question is that i am very proud of the decisions i have made and i am very proud of my state of colorado they elected me twice. they elected me to the it -- as in the electorated of two dozen for. >> how about a round of applause? [laughter] -- [applause] thank you for coming today. i would like to thank the national press club staff

organizing today's event. you can find more information about us and our -- on our website. www.press.org. thank you. we are adjourned. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> this week, a local law- enforcement's use of cell phones for surveillance purposes. and what their current law covers cell phone tracking. our guest is a staff attorney for the american civil liberties union. it airs at 6:30 p.m. eastern here on c-span. >> where is the national public

radio table? you guys are still here. [laughter] that is good. [applause] i could not remember where we landed on that. [laughter] >> later today, the 98th annual white house correspondents' dinner. president obama and jimmy kimmel headlined the event. coverage starts with the red carpet arrivals live at 6:30 p.m. much the entire dinner on c-span or sink of your experience online. c-span.org/whcd. the white house correspondents' dinner live at 630 eastern p.m. on c-span. >> if the affluent can systematically by their way out of public services and publicly

provided goods, and do they not lose a stake in the public's fear and the quality of those goods? >> mercenaries can be taken by -- paid to fight wars. you can pay to jump to the front of the line. sunday night at 9:00 p.m., harvard professor michael sandel on the moral elements of markets. part of "book tv" on c-span2. >> welcome aboard the water taxi. beautiful downtown oklahoma. i lived in oklahoma. give me a howdy, captain bric. >> our local vehicles explore the history of oklahoma city. including the works of galileo at the history of science collection at oklahoma university. >> the focus is on motion. when this book was published in 1632, the pope was angry that galileo -- his enemies during

together. this is a copy that contains his handwriting. this is like being able to look over his shoulder in the months leading up to this trial. >> may 5 and sixth, the local content vehicle in oklahoma city on c-span2 and c-span3. >> ben bernanke said economic recovery in the country continues at a moderate pace. and for by the sluggish housing sector. the fed voted to keep interest rates low through 2014. in remarks after a round of meetings on wednesday, he also warned that the u.s. faces a fiscal cliff and unless the president backs -- acts, it will not stop. >> good afternoon. before we get to questions, i will summarize's today policy

action and then i will place the committee's policy decision in the context of our economic outlook. the committee is maintaining the highly accommodative policies that we initiated at previous meetings. we decided to keep the target range. our program to extend the average maturity of the security holdings announced in september will continue as scheduled. each of these policy actions is intended to paul -- foster conditions that support the economic recovery in the context of price stability. in conjunction with today's meetings, the five board members of the 12 fed president

submitted their economic projections and policy assessment for the years 2012 through 2014 and over the long run. these projections serve as important inputs into the committee's deliberations. and coming information suggests that the economy has been expanding moderately. both participants think it will remain moderate and then to pick up gradually. among other factors and notwithstanding signs of improvement, the ongoing weakness of the housing sector still represents a head wind for recovery. strains in global markets, although less pronounced than last fall, continued to pose significant risks. the unemployment rate having fallen eight percentage points since august. however, at 8.2% the unemployment rate remains elevated. looking ahead the committee anticipates it will decline

gradually over the next several years, reflecting the moderate pace of economic growth. specifically participants projections to the unemployment rate in the fourth quarter this year have a tendency of 7.8% to 8.4% decline in the fourth quarter of 2014. for comparison, a participant estimates of the normal run of unemployment have a tendency of 5.2% to 6.0%. inflation has picked up somewhat reflecting higher gasoline prices. however, as has been the case for other swings in oil prices, the committee as -- the committee expects that affect to be temporary. consequently we anticipate inflation will subsequently run at or below to committee pose a longer run goal of two -- 2%. the economic projections submitted by participants are conditioned on their individual

assessments to the appropriate path of monetary policy. as you can see from the chart, committee participants have a range of views about when the original increase is likely to be appropriated. following a careful discussion of those views that today's meeting, they maintain their collective judgment that economic conditions will likely warrant exceptionally low levels for the federal funds rate at least through late 2014. a highly accommodative stance of monetary policy is warranted in light of persistence of the factors restraining the pace of the recovery and the ongoing risk of the economic outlook. finally, the committee took note of the decisions following the balance sheet today. we remain prepared to adjust our security holdings as appropriate to promote a stronger recovery in the context of price stability.

thank you and i would be glad to take your questions. >> thank you. some of your critics -- i am sure you will not be surprised -- think you're being too cautious. i know you just talked about the balance sheet. is the committee getting closer to qe3 that the last meeting? >> first, the committee has been the bold and aggressive in terms of easing monetary policy. we have maintained the federal funds rate close to zero since late 2008. we have had two brownson quantitative easing. we have a maturity extension program that is ongoing. we have offered guidance of the federal funds rate that goes

into late 2014. we have been very accommodative. we remain prepared to do more as needed to make sure that this recovery continues and that inflation stays close to target. in particular, we will continue to assess looking at the economic outlook and a risk, whether or not unemployment is making sufficient progress towards its longer run normal level. whether inflation is remaining close to target. if appropriate, we remain entirely prepared to take additional actions if necessary to achieve our objectives. those tools remain on the table. we will not hesitate to use them should the economy require the additional support. >> the fed has been forecasting

for some time that inflation would fall to 2% or below. the latest measures of inflation suggest that corp. pcs and the higher end of that range in many other measures are above 2%. i know that in your forecast today that the upper end of your forecast all the way through 2014 have increased. do you see a risk that the this inflationary forces might not be a strong as the fed had been projecting for some time? >> i would just say first that our projections still have inflation very close to our 2% target. as you point out, core inflation and other measures of underlying inflation have been a little stronger than expected. i would say first that some of the movement and the first quarter seems to have come from

transitory sources like nonmarket components. the fundamentals of inflation, in particular inflation expectations, the amount of slack in the economy, the commodity price behavior which is been relatively well controlled in recent months, all of these things suggest inflation will stay close to or perhaps a little bit below our 2% target. as i mentioned in the opening remarks and as we said in our briefing, the recent rise in gasoline prices has created a temporary bulge in headline inflation and overall inflation we expect that to pass through the system. assuming no new shocks in the oil sector, inflation on to moderate to about 2% later this year. >> [unintelligible] >> again, this represents 17

distinctive use. i would guess that the reason is the data had come in a little bit firmer. core inflation was a little bit stronger than expected. the differences are not particularly large. >> we know that the committee foresees rates staying low until 2014. what is your personal view on the timing of the first rate hike? second, did you see the committee as having an easing bias of the moment or is a neutral? >> i am very comfortable with the consensus view that we annunciated today. i think the committee broadly as comfortable with a 9-1 vote of this guidance. again, that represents a very accommodative stance policy. our intention is maintained highly accommodative stance and policy for the foreseeable future and we remain able and

willing to take further action if necessary. at the same time, i think it is noting -- i think it is worth noting that the forward guidance on the federal funds rate is conditional on the data. if the data were to come in much stronger than expected, we would adjust the guidance appropriately. it is not conditional. it does depend on how the outlook calls. should the outlooks strengthen notably, we would have to respond to that. >> what would we need to see to see qe3 take place? >> the committee estimate as assessments. we have been working to try to provide more explicit guidance, quantitative guidance about our policy reaction function. so far, we have not really done that. i can only said qualitatively that the committee will continue to look at the

evolution of the outlook, try to assess whether unemployment is making sufficient progress toward our objectives, and a particular whether the recovery is still continuing. we remain prepared to use tools to support the recovery and to help make sure unemployment continues its downward path towards longer run normal levels. >> mr. chairman, according to the latest forecast, 10 members of the sea 1% or higher fed funds rate in 2014. seven of them see a 2% or higher fed funds rate. under those conditions, how can the guidance in the statement that you'll -- that rates will remain low 30,004 be justified? is there a point with the descendants gets to a point where one or the other is no longer tenable? what's there is a range of views as to have noted.

>> there is a range of uses to have noted. this is put into a committee process. it is in the community -- the committee meeting where we debate not only the possible outcomes but also the risks, the uncertainties, all of the things that inform our collective judgment. as i said, the committee had no difficulty coming to a consensus that the guidance that we gave is still appropriate. again, if there is a substantial change in the economic outlook in the direction, then the guidance would change appropriately. for now, i think the committee is comfortable with the consensus statement that we put out. >> are you worried about creating confusion in the market between the guidance and the individual forecast? >> again, the individual projections are and puts -- input into the committee decision. the decision is the critical element in that respect. we are continuing to work to

become more transparent. we have a variety of things we are looking at. you will have to stay tuned for that. again, the committee was quite comfortable with the consensus that we have reported today. >> unemployment is too high. you said you expected to remain too high for years to come. inflation is under control. the you expected to remain under control? the city have additional tools available for you to use your not using them right now. under the circumstances it is hard for people to understand why you are not using the tools right now. could you edged -- could you address with your current use are inconsistent with the views held as an academic? >> let me tackle the second part first. there is a view circulating that the views i expressed about

15 years ago on the bank of japan are somehow inconsistent with our current policies. that is absolutely incorrect. my views today are completely consistent with the views that i held at the time. i made two pointed that time to the bank of japan. the first was that i believe they determine central bank should and could work to eliminate deflationary, falling prices. the second point that i made was that when short-term interest rates hit zero, the tools of a central bank are not exhausted. there are other things that the central bank can do to create additional accommodation. looking at the current situation in the united states, we are not in deflationary. when that became a modest risk in late 2010, we used additional balance sheet tools to return inflation close to the 2% target. likewise we have been aggressive and creative in using

on federal funds rate centered tools to achieve additional accommodation for the u.s. economy. the very critical difference between the japanese situation 15 years ago and the u.s. situation today is that japan was in deflationary. clearly when you are in deflationary and in recession than both sides of your mandate are demanding additional accommodation. in this case, we are not in deflationary. we have an inflation rate that is close to our objective. why do we not do more? i will reiterate we are doing a great deal. you know all the things we have done. i guess the question is, does it make sense to actively seek a higher inflation rate in order to achieve a slightly increased pace of reduction in

the unemployment rate. the view of the committee is that would be very reckless. we at the federal reserve have spent 30 years building up credibility for low and stable inflation which has proved extremely valuable and that we have been able to take strong accommodative actions in the last four or five years to support the economy without leading to a destabilization of inflation. to risk that asset for what i think would be quite tentative and perhaps doubtful gains on the real side would be a an unwise thing to do. >> given your warnings to

lawmakers about the looming fiscal cliff, do you think the fed has to take into account when congress chooses to take action? if they waited until january would you feel obligated to take in the potential economic blow into account? >> well, i think you will have to take fiscal policy into account to some extent. i think his zero important to say that no action were to be taken by the fiscal authorities, the size of the fiscal cliff is such that i think there is no chance the federal reserve could have any ability to offset that the fact on the economy. as i have said many times before, it is imperative for congress to give us a fiscal policy that achieves two principal objectives. the first is, of course to achieve fiscal sustainability

over the longer-term. that is critical and something that needs to be addressed. at the same time i think that can be done in a way that does not endanger the short-term recovery of the economy. i am concerned that a fall of the tax increases and spending cuts that are associated with the current law that would take place if any action were to occur on january 1, that would be a significant risks to the -- risk to the recovery. i am hoping congress will take action that will address both requirements of the fiscal policy. >> mr. chairman, and today posies they been you said you expect the economy to pick up gradually. in the forecast with that today we see the forecast for 2013 and and 2014, the growth

forecast is downgraded. what caused the to downgrade your forecast for 2013 and 2014 when you see a pick up after a coming quarter? >> these are the views of participants, the 17 participants. so the basic feature that is described in our statement, which is growth seems likely to pick up over time is still obviously in our projections. the 2013 numbers are stronger than the 2012 numbers and the 2014 numbers are stronger than the 2013 numbers. the reason for the expected pick-up over time is first a very accommodative monetary policy that continues to provide support for the recovery. in addition, some of the head winds that have been affecting our recovery such as the housing market, financial stresses, and credit tightness, some of those things we hope will be left in overtime and allow the economy to grow more quickly and approach more quickly its longer run full employment level.

the reason i do not know exactly why there has been a slight downgrade in years for the out, i expect the fiscal issues may be part of that. >> he made the inflation target some of a ceiling. can you explain why going over four percentage points above would hurt the fed does the credibility and what that would do on the unemployment side if he were to do that? >> it is not a ceiling. is a objective and we have to bring inflation close to 2%. if inflation were to jump for whatever reason, and we obviously do not have -- we would try to return inflation to 2% at a pace that takes into account the unemployment.

the risk of higher inflation, you say 2.5%, well, 2.5% expected change my involve the distribution outcome, some of which might be much higher than 2.5%. the concern we have is that if inflation were to run well above 2% for a contracted. ,-- contracted period, they might become eroded. i would cite to you as an example, if you look at the vice chair's speech that should give a couple of weeks ago where she described a number of ways of looking at the late 2014 guidance, she showed there some so-called optimal policy rules that come from trying to get the best possible outcomes from our quantitative models. what you see if you look at that is the best possible

outcomes assuming perfect foresight still involve inflation staying quite close to 2%. there is no presumption even our models that you need inflation well above target to make progress on unemployment. >> those of us trying to make a living out of parsing the statements noted in the section of strains in global financial markets the committee said this time around strains continued to oppose risks to the economic

outlook. in january they said the strains were easing. what are we to read into this apparent change? what is your assessment of the situation in europe with a debt crisis? >> it is supposed to be a factual description of what is happening in the environment. in january the financial markets had calmed considerably reflecting a number of steps in europe including notably, the two large long-term refinancing operations. in recent weeks we have seen more market stress arising from concerns about the fiscal positions of spain and italy. we have seen more volatility in our own markets related to that. we are simply taking note of the fact that a portion of the improvement we saw late last year and early this year in the european financial markets and in our own financial markets have been reversed recently.

nothing more intended and that. -- intended than that. i had the opportunity over the weekend to speak with many of my european and international colleagues because we had the g-20 and imf meetings here in washington. i had plenty of opportunity to discuss the european situation. it is true they have made substantial progress overall i include not only the two ltro operations but also the greek that deal, the work on the fiscal compaq's, and recently the setting up of a larger financial firewall used to avoid contagion should another country face serious financial distress. progress has been made. obviously, judging by market conditions, there is still more work to be done.

we are counting on our european colleagues to continue to follow through their commitments and to put a very strong effort into addressing what remain significant problems and concerns in europe. >> two questions. first, a follow up on steve. -- steve's. about interest rates. rates will still be close to zero at the end of 2014. given that you said the committee is not entirely happy with the language in the statement, what information can we take from the forecasts when they change like that? if he were to decide that you wanted to do more to support the economy as some point, could you read as through the feasible options to do that? >> if you compare this set of

forecasts with january you will see that a few members have pulled in their expected date. let me just reiterate that once again, these are just and puts into a decision process. they represent individual estimates. " admittedly as many of the participants said around the table, these are uncertain from an individual. of you. as we discussed the range of considerations including the fact that we remain uncertain about how the economy is going to evolve, i talked about for example the so called puzzle about whether or not unemployment will continue to fall quickly or if it will level out. given the uncertainties and given the risk like the european situation or the fiscal close the which is discussed here, there was a quite reasonable case for maintaining the guidance of late 2014.

there was a great deal of comfort among the participants and members with maintaining this guide. it looks like to big to fail is the next step. >> i believe too big to dale was a cause of the financial crisis. we are doing all we can to eliminate it. a situation where a failing firm is bailed out because it's collapse would have such this in the rest of the system.

we are making some progress. we are increasing the regulatory oversight of large financial institutions including the basel 3 rules, particularly for systemically important banks, more liquidity requirements. many are embedded in the role we put out. -- in the rule put out. we are making sure it is stronger. we're watching a much more carefully. the circumstance where a large firm does come to the brink of failure, they must be allowed to fail.

we must be allowed a. in that respect, one of the rules we have gotten from dodd/frank, does the federal reserve is working with the fdic to apply the bank resolution tools on domestic banks to complex firms. the international aspect made much more challenging. i think we're making progress there. we have put out rules that would require large financial firms to point out how they would be disassembled. we have continued to talk with colleagues about how we would cooperate if it had to be put into receivership. part of the reason there has been some downgrade for some u.s. financial institutions is

the judgment of the ratings agencies that they support. it is less than the past. what we will need to have is a situation where large firms are both making judgments about their size on the economic benefits and if there is the year it can be done without highly adverse consequences. that is our objective. that is the way to end. >> you have them working hard

to improve this. what is your assessment? >> i think that is part of the courage to say. i think we're making progress. it think it was an important step to make clear what our objection was. that was important. we have taken a number of steps to improve communication including these press conferences also by expanding our protections and by continued work doing testimony of speeches. as you know, i recently did some classes. we are doing our best with two

objectives. one is to help make the fed more understandable to the average person. many people do not understand. to be good citizens, they need to understand something about what the fed does. also to communicate to markets so markets can better appreciate what the plans are. i think the evidence is that there is a better understanding of the fed's policies. we have seen less volatility in interest rates. i want to emphasize that this is an ongoing task appeared will continue to look for ways to make ourselves more understandable and transparent. >> assuming you're not

constrained, what with the federal funds rate be taxed do you believe your at the equivalent degree using conventional tools? could you put some numbers on the exception low federal funds rate? >> for the exact reading for the federal funds rate would depend a lot on which particular role you use. it probably would be negative. we're trying to compensate for

that with the use of non standard tools including the balance sheet. we see monetary policy as being approximately in the right place. based on the analysis we have been doing, it does not mean we may not take further action. we're prepared to take further action. for the time being, it appears where more less in the right place. -- we are more or less in the right place. one of the reasons that language is sometimes a bigger than you would like this because we try to get a consensus of 10 people. it mean something close to where we are now.

>> there has been a discussion about calling for the banks to monitor it. talked-about the need to eliminate to big to fail. -- you talked about the nea to eliminate too big to fail. is there an argument to be made for baking of the banks? what is a litmus test that will allow us to know that we can achieve it through dodd/frank? >> there may be circumstances where there may be financial institutions. it is artificially large. in that context, i would

consider breaking it up. it is sending regulators should look at. a more market responsive way to address this problem is to eliminate the incentive of too big to fail. that is through tougher advisory oversight, there higher capital requirements, through restrictions, it take away the benefits or force firms to internalize the cost of the large and complex. we can safely unwind a failing firm. the mean no longer have to big to fail. the test would be that the financial markets that lending to large firms based their bond spreads solely on the risk

taking models of the firms and not on the fact that there is some anticipation of a government bailout. market indicators will help us see our progress toward and into big to fail. -- toward ending too big to fail. >> it is good to see. there has been some concern on what would happen to bond yields of operation twist. there's speculation on what the fed may do to keep downward pressure.

do you feel the need to not disappoint market expectations? >> the purpose of monetary policy is to achieve our price stability. it is not to disappoint investors. there is some disagreement about exactly how balance sheet actions affect treasury yields and other asset prices. i think the evidence is pretty good. it is the quantity of securities held by the fed at a given time rather than the flow of new purchases. this is correct, then at such

time that our purchase has come to an end there should be relatively minimal affects. we have launched the program and allowed it to come to an inch. we will continue to monitor the situation. if we believe that financial conditions are not consistent with our objectives, we will work to fix that. our expectation is that what ever a point the purchases and that financial markets being forward-looking will have anticipated that. >> thank you. my question is about your comment about japan and the u.s..

are you confident long-term stabilization like we have in japan? and that is the case, will the response make a difference? does any other factors make a different? >> i think i will draw to distinctions. the first is very important. we acted preemptively to avoid

inflation. of course japan have a much bigger bubble and shock when the bubble collapsed. we did avoid the deflation. the other thing which we have done reasonably well is that we managed fairly quickly to make sure that our banks were recapitalized and we are recognizing their bad assets. i think the stress test week conducted last month is good evidence that the banking system is incredibly stronger and much more resilience and don't -- much more resilient than it was a few years ago.

we will avoid some of the problems that japan has faced. i think it is always better to be humble than to avoid the comments. we need to contain strong monetary policy support. >> i wanted to ask you about the labor force participation rate. it is the lowest level since the early a.d.'s. can talk about why people like dropping out of the market? is like a pop a second question. -- i would like to pop a second

question. you said you should do something about puncturing the bubble before a get out of control. can you respond to that? >> i am declaring victory. as for the bond bubble, interest rates are low for a lot of reasons. they include monetary policy and a weak economy. interest rates will rise at some point. that is important for holders of long-term securities to manage their risks and pay attention to that.

all that being said, they are good reasons to continue. we have a very good discussion at the meeting. it is an important issue trying to assess how much the change of employment is doctoral and so on. there is a downward trends and participation of the united states. it comes first of the fact that we're no longer getting increase participation of women. as the society ages and for other reasons, melt the dissipation has been declining over time.

there is a downward trend that we have to take into account. the participants at the meeting suggested that a good bit of the decline in participation that we have seen does represent cyclical factors. much is young people who presumably are not out of the labor force indefinitely, but given the weak job market they are going to school rather than working. one possibility and one reason why the unemployment rate may not fall as quickly going forward is that as the labor market strengthens, they will come back looking for work. it will be a good thing. we will just have to see. i have to agree with the argument that is a living apart of decline over and above the

downward trends is representing cyclical factors. >> can you give us your assessment of the impact of the mild winter weather on job growth and that going forward? you said last month that some of the recent job gains reflected a catch up from outside. what kind of job growth can expect? >> the weather issue reflects how difficult it can be to make a real-time assessment. the weather has affected a number of things. it made january and february

artificially strong and march artificially week. it probably affected construction. there are a number of things that were probably affected. we are doing our best to try to adjust for that. we're also looking at some of the seasonality issues that have risen because of the unusually large recession now could 2008 and 2009. that makes the data harder to interpret. dismiss the hypothesis that the increase in employment we have seen in the past 56 months might to some extent be greater than we expect going forward.

it represented a one time catch-up and doing the very sharp layoffs in 2008 and 2009. we will have to see going forward. if it is correct, job gains of be somewhat left than the 250,000 a month we have seen recently. we do not know yet. i would not draw too much conclusion from the march report. because of weather and other factors, we cannot take a conclusive result from that. we will continue to be watching the labor market. that is very important. if unemployment looks like it is the longer making progress, that will be consideration. >> what are the employment protections you have made? >> we need something.

estimates differ. we need fewer jobs to keep unemployment insistence or stable than in the past. more like 100,000 a month for stability. i do not have an exact answer. this is a rough estimate. individuals may have different views. that is not a forecast. i have made a hypothesis. the possibility exists that this recovery will generate a circle with greater hiring which in turn generates more spending. which way that goes is going to be very important. it is determinant of our response.

>> thank you for the time. first up on the projections, in your bid for transparency, would you consider you and your colleagues actually attaching your name to the protections here said that markets get a better sense of exactly what your thinking in the future? as you consider where you are, all you have been through a financial crisis, what is the right now that most frustrates you? >> these things are not all the same. our subcommittee is looking for ways to improve transparency. this particular suggestion is on the table as are other ways to make this more useful.

it is a work in progress. the most frustrating aspect of the recovery has been that it is quite slow. here are almost three years from the expansion and unemployment is over eight%. we are looking in hoping that as the headwinds lift and as financial stresses he is and housing improves -- ease and housing improves, we will get more liquidity. it has been a very long slog. that'll be the single most concerning thing. there are many issues like statistical issues. within the province of the federal reserve, it to be the face of improvement in the labor market.

>> thank you. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> this week on "the communicator's" we look at cell phones and other technology for surveillance purposes and whether current law cover cell phone tracking. our guest is a staff attorney with the american civil liberties union. this afternoon at 6:00 p.m. eastern here on c-span. >> where is the national public radio table? you guys are still here. [laughter] that is good. [applause] i could remember where we landed on that. [laughter] >> later today, the 19th annual white house correspondents' dinner. president obama and jimmy kimmel

headline the event. coverage starts with the red carpet arrivals live at 6:30 p.m. to the entire dinner on c-span. you can go online at the dinner blog and social media post at c-span.org/whcd. live at 630 eastern on c-span. >> during his weekly address this week, president obama spoke about an executive order he signed on friday intending to protect u.s. military personnel, veterans, and their families from education fraud. paul ryan gave the republican address in which he spoke about the parti's proposals for reducing the nation's dead. -- get. >> on friday, i travel to georgia. i met with soldiers from the

infantry division. some of the members then they get back. those who did are fighting a different kind of battle here at home. they're looking for new jobs, new opportunities, and new ways to serve. for many, that means going back to school. america has a long tradition of making sure or veterans and men and women in uniform can afford to do that. after world war ii, we helped a generation of americans to go to school on the gi bill. kingstead the 9-11 gi bill and the assistance program, last year, we supported more than half a million veterans in over 300,000 -- and over three and a thousand service members. that is progress. it is not enough to help our veterans and service members with school. we need to make sure they have all the tools they need to make an informed decision when it comes to picking the right program. the sad truth is that there are people out there who are less interested in helping our men

and women in uniform and more interested in making a buck. they bombard students with e- mails and pressure them into making a quick decision. some of them steer recruits towards high interest loans and mislead them about job placement programs. one of the worst examples was a college recruiter who visited a marine barracks and rolled marines with brain injuries so severe that some of them could not recall what courses the recruiter sign them up for. that is appalling. it is disgraceful. even those schools to the right thing, we need to guard against bad actors who do not. i signed an executive order to make it tougher for those who tried to prey on them. we are making sure they get a simple fact sheet that lays out all the information they need about financial aid and paying for college. we are requiring schools to

offer counseling even if students have to move or deploy, and we are stepping up our efforts by strengthening the rules of who can come on base and make it easier to file complaints. when our men and women in uniform succeed, our country succeeds. it is our turn to have their backs. i am going to make sure that anyone who serves this country is going to get the opportunity that they deserve. >> hello. i represent the first district of wisconsin. as i visit with americans across the country about the economy, people often ask. is it too late to save america from a diminished future? it is a difficult question and is one that makes me worry about my own children future. the honest answer is this. it is not too late to save the

american dream. we are closer than you think to solutions that will put us on back on the path of prosperity. this president has failed to help us address are challenges. leaders in the united states senate announced they would not advance a budget for the third year in a row. tomorrow will mark three years since the senate last the filled this basic governing responsibility. this approach to budgeting has dire consequences for american families. the president and the party leaders are insisting that washington take trillions of dollars from hard-working americans in an effort to lock in higher government spending. if we have learned anything, this approach will not work. the good news is there is a better way forward, a budget

recently passed by the house of representatives that would free the nation from the constraints of the ever expanding government. this budget would promote economic growth and opportunity starting today with reforms to the tax code and a principal plan to prevent a debt crisis from happening and support safe and responsible energy exploration to address high gas prices, and it would repeal the president's health care law which is making it harder for businesses to hire new workers. repealing this law would also protect seniors. raising almost $500 billion in medicare and powering a board of on electing bureaucrats to cut medicare in ways that would deny seniors access to the care they need. our budget strengthens medicare by proposing to put 50 million seniors in charge of their

personal health care decisions. this budget would in sure the federal government could make good on its commitment to younger americans. a stark contract to the dismal economy and empty promises offered by the president. it insures the important education programs they rely on our made stronger and more sustainable. the president has hunkered down instead ofgn mode offering credible solutions to our economic challenges. they are about to go another year without a budget. by contrast, the republican-led house has passed a pro-growth budget that is awaiting action in the senate. we passed four more bills

related to stopping cyber terrorism. we are working to advance the keystone pipeline which would bring 20,000 jobs to the united states. we will get back on that path to prosperity. it is not too late to get this right. only with the right leadership in place can we renew the american promise of leaving our children a stronger nation and one that our parents left us. thank you. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> paul ryan on thursday criticized the economic policies of the administration and defended his past budget. he spoke at georgetown university in washington. he has received criticism from some catholics who say his budget unfairly affects the poor. this is an hour.

[applause] >> good morning and welcome to the 2012 lecture. my name is edward montgomery. i'm dean of the georgetown public policy institute. this event honors our friend and colleague, dr. leslie whittington, who died on september 11, 2001, all of their husband charlie and her daughters. leslie, a professor at georgetown public policy institute's and ashley recognized expert on the marriage tax was a beloved member of our community known for high spirits and engaging lectures. while we are fortunate to have many great professors here adores him, is not every day it come across the teacher who genuinely inspired her students. leslie was one of them. each year, we award a scholarship in leslie's name to a second year student at the georgetown public policy institute in as demonstrated academic excellence and a commitment to smart public policy.

among to recognize this year's winner, joseph cox. we stand up? -- will you stand up? [applause] this annual lecture is dedicated to leslie's memory and to educating the georgetown committee on pressing public policies issues of the day. this year we are fortunate to have with us congressman paul ryan. he is serving his seventh term represent wisconsin's first district. he is a graduate from ohio. he is chairman of the budget committee in the u.s. house of representatives and a senior member of the house ways and means committee. you cannot turn on the tv or log on to facebook or the internet without hearing about the looming fiscal crisis of our country faces in the coming decades.

a year ago, our nation nearly defaulted on its debt for the first time in its history. while we may have stepped back from that abyss, the challenge that confronts us is far from over. georgetown public policy institute faculty members serb with congressman ryan on the president of the budget commission and came up with a plan for addressing this crisis. alice rivlin devised a second plan within entered dmitri that also addressed the problem. despite these and other plants, no consensus appears to be on the horizon. government leaders continue to be deadlocked in coming up with an approach to solve this problem. as chief budget writer for the house, congressman-at the center of efforts to resolve these issues. he has presented a roadmap for america's future that envisions a fundamentally different role for the federal government and our economy in addressing social issues. his plan proposes to tackle the long-term budget deficits by cutting taxes to promote growth and cutting government spending.

republicans led his vision for the future. the young age of 42, he is often mentioned as a potential vice presidential nominee. if you want to break some news today, feel free. this plan is not without controversy. in some ways, he is at the center of a debate that our colleague has written is as old as our nation, that quintessential tension between our struggle of the rugged individualist and our strong sense of communal obligation. many democrats and republicans see very different visions for future in the country as they struggle for imbalances between these competing instincts. please join me in welcoming congressman paul ryan. [applause]

>> thank you so much. what a beautiful place, by the way. this is gorgeous. the need for well-informed public discourse has never been greater. i think that is why this lecture series is such a moving tribute to the memory of leslie whittington. i was voting on the house for a couple of days ago and one of the senior leadership staffers pulled me aside and said leslie whittington was the best professor i ever had. she was a student here at georgetown. she spoke so adoring the of the impact he had on her lap. it is just like to see that her memory is still being honored by this, and i am honored to be here as part of this lecture series. georgetown is america's first catholic universities. the jesuits have done a great job of educating our nation for generations. i appreciate the dialogue. our copy of my budget with me so we could have a fact based

conversation on the facts as they are, not as some have reinterpreted. did you ever hear the story about the methodist who went to heaven and at st. peter at the pearly gates? let me get into it, then. this methodist goes to heaven and meets st. peter at the pearly gates. saint peter takes him on a tour like he does for everybody. they go down this beautiful building and this long haul and they come to the first door. they hear laughter and music and singing and the methodists ask st. peter, what is behind that door? he said that is the presbyterians. they keep going down the hallway and come to another door. the year praising and music. he said that is the baptists. they turned a corner and go down a long hall, but before they get to the next door, peter says be very, very quiet. that is the catholics, and they

think they are the only people up here. [laughter] that takes a minute to sink in, doesn't it? i suppose there are some catholics who, for a long time, thought they had a monopoly of sorts, not exactly in heaven, but on the social teaching of our church. of course there can be differences among the faithful catholics on this. the work i do as a catholic holding office conforms to the social doctrine as best i can make of it. what i have to say about the social doctrine of the church is from the viewpoint of a catholic in politics applying my understanding to the problems of the day. serious problems like those we face today require terrible conversation. civil public dialogue goes to the heart of solidarity. the virtue that does not divide society into classes but builds up the common good of all.

the overarching brett to our whole society today is the exploding federal debt. the holy father himself, pope benedict, has charged governments, communities, and individuals running up high debt levels are "living at the expense of future generations and living an untruth." we in this country have a window of time before it gets to economic crisis becomes inevitable. we need to take control before our own needy suffer the same fate of greece. how we do this is a question for provincial judgment about which people of good will can differ. if there was every time for serious but respectful discussion among catholics as well as those who do not share our faith, that time is now. as the dollar around southern wisconsin and visit with americans across the country, explaining that our debt is on track to cripple the economy,

showing people charts and graphs to back it all up, they often ask me, is it too late to save america from a diminished future? is the american experiment over? it is difficult question. it is one that gives me a little pause. the honest answer is the one i am about to give you. nobody ever got rich betting against the united states of america, and i'm not about to start. time and again, when america has been put to the test, when it looked like the era of american exceptional is and was coming to a close, we got back up and got back to work, advancing our community, advancing our society, and leaving the boundaries of opportunity ever for. churchill put it best. the americans can be counted upon to do the right thing, but only after they have exhausted

all the other possibilities. look, we have exhausted the other possibilities. after four straight trillion dollar deficits and very little economic progress to show for it, i think we know what doesn't work. we also have a growing consensus around the ideas that will work. but will not willing partners at the highest levels to lead us, to unite us, and to address our defining talent. the president did not cause the crisis we face. years of empty promises from both political parties brought us to this moment. but regrettably, the president is unwilling to advance credible solutions to the problem. he has broken a promise he made during his last campaign, to help us "rediscover our bonds to each other and get out of this constant, petty bickering that has come to characterize our politics."

it does not seem to understand and cannot promote the common good by setting class against class or group against group. the device of politics e.g. the divisive politics of the last few years have not only undermined social solidarity, they have brought progress and reform to a standstill, at a very time when america is desperate for solutions to this coming crisis. today, we face a fundamental challenge to the american way of life. a gathering storm whose primary manifestation is the shadow of our ever-growing national debt, and whose most troubling consequence is ever shrinking opportunities for americans, young and old, and the shadow hangs over young people to face a struggling economy and rising probability of greater turmoil ahead. more than half of recent college graduates are unemployed or underemployed in this economy. the shadow hangs over our seniors who have been lied to

about their retirement security. it hangs over our parents. we wonder if we will be the first generation in american history to leave our children with fewer opportunities and less prosperous nation than the one we inherited. this storm has already hit europe, where millions are enduring the painful consequences of empty promises turning into broken promises. for too many in washington, instead of learning from europe's mistakes, we are repeating them. our descent down this path was accelerated four years ago when poor decisions and bad policies from wall street to washington resulted in the crisis that squandered the nation's savings and crippled our economy. what we needed then for policies to strengthen the foundations of our free enterprise economy. what we got was the opposite. we needed single-minded focus on restoring economic growth.

after the immediate panic in 2008 that saw, we need to restore real accountability in the financial sector and just clean up the mess. we needed to restore the principle that those who seek to reap the gains in our economy also bear the full risk of the losses. we need policies to control our debt trajectory so that families and businesses were not threatened the the shadow of an ever rising debt. instead, the white house in the last congress enacted an agenda that made matters worse. they miss spent hundreds of billions of dollars on politically connected boondoggles. then when the country's number- one priority remained in getting the economy back on track, the white house in the last congress made their number one priority a massive, and one expansion in the government's role in health care. they even tried to impose a costly increase in energy prices in the middle of a recession. their idea of wall street reform -- a blank check for fannie mae and freddie mac, and a new law

that provided more protection and preferential treatment for the big banks and gave more power to the same regulators who failed to see the last crisis coming. their reliance on government of the heavy hand with more borrowing, more spending, and unprecedented interventions into the private sector were not just bad policy. they created a tremendous uncertainty for businesses and families as job losses continued to mount. we needed solutions to restore the american idea, an opportunity society in which the government's role is not to read the rules and and for equal outcomes, but in the words of abraham lincoln, to clear the past of laudable pursuit for all so that all may have an opportunity to rise and free pursue their happiness. instead, the white house in the

last congress exports to the crisis to advance a government center society, a massively expanded role in the federal government in our lives, higher spending to support this expanded role, and higher taxes to support dyer spending. higher borrowing, too. its report five years, the debt held by the public has grown by $4.5 trillion. that is a 70% increase. our debt is projected to get much worse, spiraling out of control in the years ahead. this bleak outlook is what is paralyzing economic growth today. investors, businesses, and families look at the size of the debt and help back, for fear that america is heading for a diminished future. should that future arrive, it would mean real pain for all americans. but higher interest rates would make it harder for families to

buy homes. for students to go to college, and for businesses to expand and create jobs. it would mean more than economic pain to you and me. if we remain on this path, and bond markets in the state of panic will turn on us, threatening to end the american idea itself. forced to austerity, broken promises and sacrifices from abroad but in into that most fundamental of american aspirations, that in this land, we are responsible for our own destiny. analysts continent will not forever be free from foreign powers to impose their limits on our dreams for ourselves and for children. if our generation fails to meet its defining challenge, we would see america surrender her independence to an army of foreign creditors who now owns roughly half of our public debt. it pains me to say this, but the president of the policies

guarantee that outcome if we don't turn this around soon. the good news is there is a better approach. a budget passed by the house of representatives that would lift the debt and free the nation from the constraints of ever expanding government. if enacted, this budget would promote economic growth and opportunity starting today appeared with bold reforms to the tax code and a credible plan to prevent a debt crisis from ever happening. the president is clearly threatened by this alternative vision. he is hoping to win the next election by attacking our good faith effort to secure opportunity for the next generation. the president is not only wrong on the policy, but he is wrong on the politics as well. americans resent being told what kind of car to drive or what kind of libel to use. they certainly do not think

bureaucrats in washington should be empowered to dictate their personal health care decisions. the hallmarks of the president of the government centered agenda is is that policy after policy takes from hard working americans and give to politically connected companies and privileged special interests. our budget calls this what it is, corporate welfare, and we propose to end it. as we end welfare for those who do not eat, we strengthen welfare programs for those who do. government safety net programs have been stretched to the breaking point in recent years, failing the very citizens who need help most. these are not just practical questions. these questions have moral implications as well. since we meet here today, and america's first catholic university, i feel it is important to discuss how as a catholic in public life, my own personal thinking on these issues has been guided by my

understanding of the church's social teaching. simply put, i don't believe that the preferential option for the poor means at preferential option for big government. just look at the results of the government centered approach to the war on poverty. one in six americans are in poverty today. that is the highest rate in a generation. in this war on poverty, poverty is winning. we need a better approach. to me, this should be based on the twin virtues of solidarity and subsidiarity. government is one more for things we do together. but it is not the only word. we are a nation that prides itself on looking out for one another. the government has an important role to play in that. but relying on distant government bureaucracies to lead this effort just has not

worked. instead, our budget built in historic welfare reforms in the 1990's. we and to empower state and local governments, communities and individuals, those closest to the problem, and we aim to promote opportunity and a probability by strengthening job training programs to help those who have fallen on hard times. my mentor, jack kemp, used to say you cannot help america's poor by making america poor. the mountain of new debt the president has helped create, much of that barred from china or simply printed at the federal reserve, has made america poor. those unwilling to lift the debt our complicity in our acceleration toward a debt crisis in which the poor would be hurt the first and the worst. our budget lists the debt, fosters a growing economy, and ensures that a government

program makes good on their important promises. instead of letting our critical health retirement programs go bankrupt, our budget saves and strengthens them the that they can fulfill their missions in the 21st century. the president likes to talk about medicare. we welcome the debate. we need this debate. but the president will not tell you that he has already changed medicare forever. his new health care law puts a board of 15 unelected bureaucrats in charge of cutting medicare. we should never turn the fate of our parents and grandparents over to an unaccountable board and let them make decisions that could deny them access to their care. my mom relies on medicare. we all are and all our seniors a better program, one can actually count on. our budget keeps the protections that make medicare a guarantee

promised seniors throughout the years. it makes no changes for people in or near retirement. in order to save medicare for future generations, we propose to put 50 million seniors, not 15 unaccountable bureaucrats, in charge of their personal health care decisions. our budget and our seniors to choose from a list of coverage that works best for them, that is required to offer at least the same benefits as traditional medicare. it says that if a senior months to choose traditional medicare plan, then she should have the right. our idea is to force insurance companies to compete against each other in order to better service the -- server -- in order to better serve seniors. we disagree with that characterization. our plan offers the best way to guarantee quality, affordable health care for all of our nation's seniors for generations to come. the president also likes to

talk about taxes. we welcome this debate. we need this debate. the president remains committed to working americans. it is to chase ever higher government spending. we believe there is a better way forward. the tax code should be fair, simple and competitive. we propose a total overhaul. we lower rates across the board. revenue goes up every year under our budget. the economy grows. we propose to close the special interest loopholes that primarily go to the well- connected and well up here we in washington did not need to micromanage people's decisions to the tax code.

this passed the house earlier this spring. they have gone another year of the budget. the president has hunkered down. people are right to look at how polarized it has become. they're wondering if we have ever fix this mess. the political class needs the pessimism. they have given up on american renewal. they say america's time for leading the world as post. the task is to manage the nation's decline. i reject such defeatism. america has been here before. we did not give of then and we won't give up now. maybe the senate to not remember 1980. so many of washington had given up on the american people. they expect you to tell your

children that the american people no longer have the will to cope with their problems. the future will be one of sacrifice and few opportunities. america did something that we as a people are famous for. we refuse to listen to our betters. we voted for a man, more than that an idea. the idea that if we took power from bureaucrats and return it to the people, americans working together to restore the principles of american exception ellison and build a future that they can be proud of. these principles are not exclusive to one political party. the patient centered medicare programs has a long history of bipartisan support. medicare reform is based on choice and competition. in recent years, i have worked for democrats to advance the same kind of reforms.

tax reform space on lowering rates goes back to the reagan administration. the democrats served as a co- sponsor. more recently, this is the best means to simplify the tax code. it makes sense that these ideas have attracted leaders of both parties. patient centered medicare offers the only guarantee that medicare can keep its promise to seniors for generations to come. progress tax reform of going great wall closing loopholes that primarily benefit the well off can eliminate fairness and ensure a level playing field. this coalition must attract americans from all walks of

life. progress will require the removal of certain partisan roadblocks. a far health care law -- a flawed health care law that must be replaced. only with the right leadership in place can we move forward with ideas that renewed the american promise of leaving our children with a stronger nation than what our parents left us. look. it is rare in american politics to arrive at a moment in which the debate revolves around the fundamental nature of american democracy and social contract. that is exactly where we are today. one approach gives more power to unelected bureaucrats, it takes more from hard-working taxpayers to fuel the expansion of government and commit our nation to a feature of debt and

decline. this approach is proving unworkable. congress and this path fails to do justice to either subsidiary or solidarity. our budget offers a better path. it is consistent with how i understand my catholic faith. we put trust in people. they are returning to power families. this is the belief that all people are born with a god- given right to human flourishing. protecting this equal rights of all persons is required for solidarity. trusting citizens to determine

what is in their best interests. and to make the right choices about the future of our country. the choice before us cannot be more clear. continuing down the path we're on would mean becoming the first generation to break faith with the american generation. but there's one thing you hear me said, this will not be our destiny. americans will not stand for a shrug condition of our future. we will get back on a path to prosperity. it is not too late to get this right. thank you very much. [applause]

>> i like to think the audience members and students to submit it. if you still have questions, and their people from the lecture he will take these questions. where to start off with a couple of questions we ask from students to the congressman. if you have additional questions, please pass into the end of the aisles. you spoke a bit during your speech about the letter from the faculty. they are clearly concerned about the moral dimension. and whether the tax cut will this for torsion lay the to those who are wealthy.

there is a generational issue as well. can you say a few more words? >> to cannot let people out of poverty do not have a growing economy. we have to put the policies to maximize economic growth. we also need to have upward mobility. we want to make sure that our safety net is required to get people from this. you have to have programs that work to do that. what we saw in the 1990's, i have to tell you, in wisconsin and worked really well. we did this to meet the unique needs of the county and city. we got involved. this work so much better than i think you're having before.

-- than we were having before. these are levels that are quite unsustainable. food stamps went up. our budget if you just take the top comic it is proposed to grow spending at about 3% a year. hardly draconian i would argue. more to the point, want to get to a system that is fair that makes the same kind of income. when we raise the individual tax rates, we are hitting such small businesses really hard. eight out of 10 businesses pay their taxes as individuals.

in wisconsin, nine of the 10 filed in taxes as individuals. because the partnerships. their top effective tax rate is 48.4% in january. overseas, which in wisconsin and let superior, the canadiens just lower their tax rate. 65% of net new jobs come from the successes of businesses. the driver of wisconsin and look at the industrial park. the odds are it is successful with maybe two and a 15 employees who are paying that. when we think we're hitting the guy in the yacht, where getting a successful small business. we do not want to have revenue problems. we're saying get rid of the loopholes. every person who them park money in a tax shelter, that its hero. takes away the tax shelter and

it is 25%. theree're saying is that are better policies that make us competitive to help us grow our economy. will we take a look at our poverty fighting strategy is, of what is the objective facts but it to treat the symptoms of poverty to make it easier to live with that or is it to the region to live with that bill -- will we take a look at our party fighting strategies, what is left of the objective? but we treat the symptoms of poverty to make it easier to live with? we are not saying you're stuck in your station in life. this is antithetical to our american idea. >> the house is dealing with the education funding.

there are cuts to the bell program. our students are very concerned about the impact of what it will do to close off access to higher education. what do you have to say? >> this is washington. we keep this at $5,500 but do not have the increase, we keep the award at $5,500. the progress has increased tremendously. we need to look at tuition inflation. when you get the spending on these programs, you will see a direct correlation with this. rather than have taxpayers subsidize the situation, of let's look at why tuition is growing at such a fast pace relative to anything else we buy.

let's not keep paying for a fast increase. let's look at why it is buying up faster. that is a big deal. we keep this. that is the way washington works. if he did not sign up for the proposed increase in to increase it at a slower rate, that is a big cut. that is that the way it works and families and businesses. it seems to be the way it works around here. >> we are facing a dollar trillion deficit. the thing is to be done. you were a member of that committee. you did not vote for the plan. what part of the plan did you vote for?

>> i have a great respect for allen. they are great people. it did not fix the problem. i did not want to tell them i just voted for a plan to fix the problem when i know it did not fix the problem. you cannot prevent a debt crisis if you do not deal with the health care entitlement problems. we offered an amended some symbols which was rejected. it tended to deal with medicare reform and medicaid reform. those ideas were rejected. we pass a plan that leave the country to fall into complacency. only to know that we're going to have a debt crisis. affair going to fix the problem, let's fix the problem. >> this is close to your home.

how did these statistics play a role in your vision for the budget? >> we had this issue. >> i was in racine a couple of days ago. it is a manufacturing town. and manufacturers have the greatest skills. look at what they're looking at. they're looking at our energy prices. they are looking at debt hangover. they're looking at a system that will blow up in their face in january the first. they are holding back.

if these increases kick in in january and bring their tax rates up as such tirades that they're paying twice the rate of their competitors, it makes a really hard to compete. when we taxed our competitors hire, they win and we lose. the best things for kenosha and for all of us is to have a system that is really competitiveness. you and i were talking off line. we have the gm plant. this industry just that decimated where we live. a lot of people do not have the career anymore. one of my friends for has all but they get a job just like their folks did. they had this real awakening. this is what is behind as job- training reforms.

we have 49 different job training programs. we did not even measure if they work. how do we get skills to our population so that we can stay out of the curve? right now we have these programs that have all the bureaucracies and red tape from washington. let's clear that out and have a system that is responsive so when a person is down on their but, they have a shot to getting back on their feet to

make something of themselves and be proud. most people believe in the american dream. make yourself what you want to be. make your kids better off. because of the debt crisis, this is where we are. both parties made a budget in the promises that the government cannot keep. the sooner we are honest about that, the better we can have economic policies that make our companies more competitive. these are the things that matter the most. they raise their individual tax rates. i think this is the number. there back in the debt crisis. these businesses what to know that they stick in wisconsin. the are really sensitive on these things.

you have to make sure that you are competitive on your taxes and. that is a key source done -- keycorp son to get this back on pat. >> -- he cornerstone to get this back on track. >> why are spending cuts required? >> i think i get the gist of that. deficits are deficits. we have a big one. what people like me are worried about is we do not want to chase ever higher spending with ever higher taxes. this is a spending he driven crisis. on the current base line, they

are going above the 40 year average rate. spending is projected to literally explode. for the last 60 years, we have taken 20 cents out of every dollar to spend on a federal government. by the time kids are my age, we will take 40 cents out of every dollar. at the end of the time it is 80 cents. we have a spending debt crisis coming. there is no way you can tax your way out of this. the system crashes in the 20 30's. what we want to do is get the spending under control. we have to restructure its so it makes good on the promises. you want to have tax policies that keep it for the international economies. camera revenues come in? of course they can. -- can new revenues come in?

of course they can. >> you mentioned your plan is to raise trillions of dollars by closing loopholes and ending tax breaks. it is a serious and courageous politicians. >> we do not want to do this with a health-care law was written. in a back room where we cut a deal, it is from here. we want to have hearings and the ways and means committee to go through all of the corners of the tax code. we want to put everything on the table. we want to find out what makes the most sense. there is fiscal space left for tax expenditures. we want to have hearings to decide which ones are the best ones to keep. this is not just what loopholes of the tax code but who gets

them. the people in the top two brackets get almost all the tax shelters. that is where you should start right away. this means more of their income is where revenue comes in here. it gives you the ability to bring your rate down. it is not just what but to as well. if we do not have some plan that we're going to hoist, that is the wrong way. we want to tell everyone who cares to make your case. let's have openings basin equity and fairness. -- based on equity and fairness. >> we navigated for fiscal consolidation. are you concerned what that is

going to do to the economy? >> since ron paul started subsiding, i used to get a lot of from paul questions. timmy the foundation -- the foundation is money. i worry about what we are building up with their monetary policy. i believe we should get more toward a monetize policy. that is not a crazy things to say. i think our monetary policy should be focused on a single mandate and price stability. we should stand as necessary signals, because if we do that, i think that will help us keep interest rates from blowing up in getting away from us.

we want to have a monetary policy that is clear and transparent and focus on a single mandate of price stability. i do not think he can help employment if you have a schizophrenic dole mandate. -- dual mandate. if push comes to shove, our fiscal policy is on a collision course, and it can in really ugly. this is why i think the sooner we can have a sound monetary policy focus on price stability, the better we can stabilize the horizons to show that the dollar will be good in stable. there are currency will maintain itself as a reliable thing of value. one of the most insidious things a government can do is change is currency. it is spanish the purchasing power of people who live on a fixed income.

that is what we want to sock from happening. i'm worried that this of the last option if we keep going down the path we're on. >> technology plays a large role in our economy. low-skilled workers have been falling farther and farther behind. do you have a proposal to help those tax hikes you have to get the basics right. as a federal representative, i try not to get deep into micromanaging education reforms. i think we should break those special interest arrears and making it harder to reform our schools. we can make sure that kids get the best possible education.

that is really important. that is the seed of upward mobility. i think the better government has a very good role to play in the job training aspects for a person who is older and life. this is really important. this is where technology comes into play. we need technology to flourish. but got to stop kicking out the really smart people. people get these ph.d. is. there be set and and they leave. what we want to do that tax and what to have more human capital. immigration policy on this along with better tax policy. if we get those basics right,

it to make sure that we can still dominate the world economy like we have in the past. >> somebody said if he could recapture fiscal commission vote, would you change your mind? greece has deteriorated quite rapidly. how close do you seize the u.s. being to the greek situation? >> no. you think i'm going to give you some data on that? we talked to a lot of experts. the story i get from the folks that we consult on this, everyone wants to know when it is coming to america.

the consensus i get is the reserve currency. that buys as time. that baez's a unique opportunity. year passes issues. -- europe has -- that buy us a unique opportunity. europe has its issues. these are not working in a keep redoing them. we do not have this. we have this divided government. i think they're watching to see what happens. they see, i want the market snow that fell least one half of the political equation is putting serious ideas on the table on how we will prevent this debt crisis. we would drive the debt to prevented from happening. we're going to wait and see

what happens. in 2013, they will look to see if you get this under control. it will not take much for them to start turning on us if they believe our political system will continue collapsing. s&p downgraded not because of our data but because of a political observation. if we had this gridlock, i believe there is a bipartisan consensus to be had. it is not willing to be this. the ideas they're having broadened the base. there are democrats and republicans to have historically seen eye to eye. that is the basis for a bipartisan consensus.

>> number one, this is a principle that often gets overlooked. it is something that is to be connected with solidarity. it's simply means much more distant government. subsidiary without solidarity means much more individualism.

these things are in harmony with one another. people of good will can disagree on where the need to be between the two. if you go through all of these things, people of good will can disagree about how you balance the two. subsidiary, it is related to the concept of the application of that social idea. that means government and institutions closest to the people govern and served best. it keeps the human interaction and place. it is not some cold, distant bureaucrats sitting in washington that sees you as a decimal point on a spreadsheet. it knows you and knows your problems and sees the suffering you are experiencing that has

the resources to help you. that to me is the key to all of this. i worry with the debt we have been having and we have been spending our power out to the federal government, we are doing damage to the principal subsidiary the. so we can better serve the common good. if you have too much government, you displace the civil mediating institutions that we call civil society. the churches, those civic groups, the ways we interact with each other and our communities. you make it harder for the space to be filled and that does damage. to me i think we have gone too far in one direction. the cultural problems, relic his son and the rest has been manifested by these policies.

while at intended as they are the results are not very good. local involvement in control and let us try to reapply those we can get back to the idea of america. our rights come from nature and god, not government. the role of government is to promote equal opportunity. and pursue happiness however we define it so long as we are not on coaching on another's. this should not be to equalize. if you live the go out, and equal opportunity, you have to have a larger government. the problem is, you end up running out of other people's money to spend and you have a

debt crisis and that is what we want to avoid. >> it looks like we're running out of time. i have one last question for you. we could not get you to make any news -- what about the characteristics of a vice- president? >> i do not want to go into hypothetical. i have an important job where i am right now. i am content. i feel that america is in a very unique moment and we have to get it right. and do not underestimate the importance of congress in all of this. who knows about those things? we have important work to do in the house and i take that seriously. >> i hope everybody joins me in thanking you very much for coming. [no audio] -- [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012]

>> this week on "the communicator's" a look at the use of cell phones and other technology for surveillance purposes and whether current law cover cell phone tracking. our guest is a staff attorney with the american civil liberties union. the communicators. this afternoon at 6:00 p.m. eastern here on c-span. tonight at 6:30 p.m. eastern on c-span, the 98th annual white house correspondents' dinner. along with president obama, jimmy kimmel is headlining the event. following the footsteps of well- known comedians. we spoke with him to get his thoughts on being chosen and how he is preparing for this evening. >> himmy -- jimmy kimmel.

tough crowd. how do you prepare? >> that is what everyone says. it makes me nervous. i guess if the room is tough, you have to fight your way out of it. maybe i will not show up. maebelle i will have a moment of silence -- maybe i will have a moment of silence for 40 minutes. >> that would be an exciting moment on c-span. how do you prepare? >> we write a lot of jokes. we go through the jokes and determine if they are to offensive for the room. then, we debate that sort of thing a lot and ultimately, we come up with a bunch of jokes in a certain order that we feel will work. when i say we, niemi and the writers of my show. -- i mean me and the writers of my show. we see how it goes. >> where do you draw the line when it comes to singe, not to

burn? >> dareen lot of lines -- there are a lot of lines. part of it is, you know, you do not want to harp on one topic. obviously, the secret service being is something i will talk about, but not necessarily 30 jokes about it. i will stop at 20. >> have you had an experience where you had the president of the united states listening to your jokes and -- how good is he for this? >> he is not great for comedians because he can probably be a comedian himself if he wanted to. it is more fun when you have a bill clinton or george bush. people who are more courtney -- cartooney. the president keeps to himself. if somebody throws and a basketball, he makes the shot. he ruins everything. i have never been in a situation where i have done comedy in front of the president.

>> are you a political comedian? >> i do not think so. i probably talk a bar at the kardashians more about politics. >> how long have you been on this trip and in the blast, have you booked in the interactive? >> i have been here a few times. i love washington, d.c.. the fact they you can go to these monuments and sit under the lincoln memorial in the middle of a the night, it is fantastic. when i came here, i thought i would be looking at a statue but to see some of these memorials in the white house -- i have never been in the white house before. i probably will never be asked back, either. it is very cool. >> what do you think about all the attention that the

washington press course gives? chrissy it makes sense it would give a lot of attention to a dinner with a big host. there is a lot of attention. it is an unusual thing. you have an unusual mix of people sitting in a room with the president and with all of the top people in media and then you hire some buffoon to come in and entertain and you feel like you have been commanded by the king to be the court jester or something. >> seth miers has done this. have you consulted with him or at least watched performances? >> i spoke with said miers. i did not speak to rich or don. i spoke to stephen colbert. frank sinatra hosted this thing. there is so much history here. it really is an honor.

i know it is cliche, but it is an honor to be asked to do this. >> when were you asked and what was your reaction? >> some secret service agents burst into my bedroom in the middle of the night and they said, you are doing this. i said, can we relax and have a few drinks? they called my agent and my publicist and they called me and i said it was great and then i realized i had to actually do it. >> where you from? >> i am from brooklyn. i grew up in vegas. i did not graduate college. we are off to a dead star right there. i was in radio for a long time before i want up on television. now, somehow, i wound up here. >> jimmy kimmel tonight. >> average of the correspondents' dinner kicks off this evening with red carpet arrivals beginning at 6:30 p.m.

eastern. >> year ago. welcome. beautiful downtown oklahoma city. i am captain rick. give me a howdy. >> this week and on our vehicles explore the history of literary culture of oklahoma city. including the works of galileo at the history of science collections at oklahoma university. >> the most important part of the book was on motion but when it was published, the pope was angry that galileo had broken his promise between hypothetically. his enemies joined and the result was this trial. copy that contains his own handwriting. this is like being able to look over his shoulder in the months leading up to his trial. >> all next week and, the local content vehicles in oklahoma and c-span3.n t2

>> the supreme court heard oral arguments on the constitutionality of arizona's immigration law. former arizona senators and other officials discuss the immigration policies and how they're impacting -- there is impacting the latino community. jan brewer was invited to appear at this hearing but declined. >> good morning. the in 2011, state legislatures from across the country introduced 1607 bills and resolutions relating to immigration. by the end of the year, 42 states have enacted 197 new laws.

tomorrow, the supreme court is going to be considering whether the rise on a lot -- baier as the allies constitutional. specifically, the court will decide if states can enact immigration enforcement laws tonight -- tonight -- that is supposed to allow itself the portman. court challenges have been filed against five of the laws and the outcome of the cases will likely be dictated by the supreme court's's decision in the eras on a case. discussing both the constitutionality and prudence of these laws was necessary because the supreme court will base its decision upon what the senate had previously said about the role of state and local government in enforcing federal immigration law. the wisdom of the arizona what is being debated around the

country. for instance, the bill has been endorsed as a model for the country by mitt romney, the republican nominee for president. others such as marco rubio have said they do not believe the arizona law should be expanded nationwide. in my view, these laws are both counterproductive and unconstitutional. in terms of being counterproductive, the statistics could not be any clearer in terms of the economic damage they cause. in arizona, after the law was passed, the tourism industry lost as much as $140 million. moreover, the agriculture industry has seen much of their crops destroyed due to a lack of labor. in alabama, a study by the university of alabama found that the alabama law is projected to shrink alabama's economy by $2.3 billion annually and cost the state's $70,000 per year. sorry, 70,000 jobs per year.

in terms of being unconstitutional, our founding fathers gave congress power over immigration. the supreme court has consistently interpreted the naturalization language in article one to mean that the establishment of the immigration laws and the manner of their execution are committed solely to the federal government. even though some on the other side want to limit the federal government's power and increase the power of the states. immigration is not and never has been in an area where states are able to exercise independent authority. this makes sense, both legally as a matter of constitutional interpretation and practically as a matter of sound public policy. immigration involves international commerce and sensitive foreign relations. just as we would never allow 50 states to have their own inconsistent trade laws, we should not have 50 states in

establishing and enforcing their own inconsistent immigration laws. and even in states like arizona say they are only helping the federal government to enforce the law, this issue is much like federal tax law. where the federal internal revenue service interprets and enforces the law as opposed to 50 state agencies going to people's houses to make sure that they properly file their federal tax returns. only federal comprehensive immigration reform can accomplish the three objectives most americans want to see achieved with regard to immigration. first, ending illegal immigration. second, fixing our dysfunctional legal immigration system, and they're addressing the status of people here without legal status. in 2010, many of my democratic colleagues on this committee released a white paper outlining our proposal for immigration reform. then, as a good faith down payment to encourage negotiations with those who

said fix the border first, we passed a $600 million supplemental border security act that added 115 -- 1500 troops on the border, deplored more aerial drones, and increase technology. the border bill was held by my arizona colleagues. as a result of this bill, arizona's 373 mile border with mexico is patrolled by over 5200 border patrol agents and 300 national guards. a 31% increase from 2008. it is a result -- it has resulted in a 61% reduction in unlawful crossings. yesterday, a few -- a study reported that immigration from mexico has dropped when comparing the number of people entering the u.s. from mexico to the number of people returning to mexico.

some in arizona might wish to take credit for this, but studies show this is a national trend. based on the increased federal enforcement at the southern border and decrease the availability of jobs for foreign workers. this chart reveals immigration to the u.s. from mexico. it is national. because of what we have done on the border, as you, that number has gone down from a high of 770,000 people in 2002. we have invited our colleagues to sit down with us and discuss how best to reform our broken immigration system in a manner of both -- in a manner both parties can support. to this day, our colleagues will not even sit down with us and discuss comprehensive immigration reform legislation.

finally, when small noncontroversial immigration matters are propose that can help create jobs, they are blocked in the senate. consequently, states are taking matters into their own hands and are passing a multitude of immigration laws that touch upon a variety of subjects such as employment authorization, border security, work visas, and higher education. areas that have always been the exclusive province of the federal government. i believe it is too damaging to our economy into dangerous to our democracy to have 50 states doing 50 different things with regard to immigration policy. i also believe that congress has clearly and repeatedly indicated its intent to preempt states from creating their own immigration enforcement regimes. this is why i believe this law is unconstitutional. for instance, in 1997, congress passed section 287 of the immigration and nationality act.

it allows state and local law enforcement to enter into partnerships to conduct immigration enforcement within jurisdictions. in enacting the bill, congress made it clear it did not want the states, like arizona, taking immigration enforcement matters into their own hands and instead, wanted state officials to act with guidance, training, and supervision of the federal government. in addition, congress wrote employment verification laws that were designed to punish employers rather than employees for violations of immigration law. arizona has decided to criminalize the individuals who seek work to feed their families. this conflict of law plainly contravenes our stated in tents we take our intent. i am, therefore, announcing that should the supreme court choose to ignore these plain and unambiguous statement of congressional intent and uphold

this law, i will introduce legislation that reiterates that congress does not intend for states to enact their own immigration enforcement schemes. my legislation will be emphasized and state officials can only engage in the detention of unlawfully prison individuals if they are doing so pursuant to an explicit agreement with the federal government and are being supervised by federal officials. states like arizona and alabama will no longer be able to get away with saying that they are helping the federal government and to enforce the law when they are really writing their own lot and knowingly deploying untrained officers with a mission of arresting anyone and everyone who might fit the preconceived profile of an illegal immigrant. my legislation will also reemphasized the state and local governments are pre-empted from enacting their own employment verification laws and penalties, a federal pre-emption of employment verification loss has been endorsed by the u.s.

chamber of commerce and many other business groups and trade associations. i hope colleagues from both sides of the aisle will join me in this effort, in the event it becomes necessary, which i hope and belief it will not, because i believe the supreme court will decide that this law is not constitutional. based on the evidence that is on one side. i now look forward to hearing from our panel. i turn it over to senator byrd and. >> thank you for calling this hearing of the immigration subcommittee. on the question of the arizona immigration law. i join you and hoping that the supreme court finds it unconstitutional. under our constitution, states to not have the right to pass their own laws preventing federal laws on immigration. it is wrong. it is counterproductive.

decriminalize people because of their status, their immigration status. law-enforcement, incidently, does not have the time or resources to prosecute or incarcerate every undocumented immigrant. the riz on immigration law will simply detour undocumented immigrants from being part of the copper -- part of that committee. do not take my word for it. asked the arizona association of chiefs police who oppose sb1070. there is a troubling aspect of this immigration law board. according to experts, this encourages racial profiling. last week, i held a hearing on racial profiling. we heard testimony about the provision in this law requiring police officers to check the immigration status of any individual if they have reasonable suspicion that the

person is an undocumented immigrant. the explanation of the law went further to say how you can gather this notion of a reasonable suspicion and it went on to say by the way person dresses or by their command of the english language. one of the witnesses at this racial profiling hearing was run davis, the chief of police of east palo alto, california. chief davis along with 16 other law enforcement officers and major city chiefs of police association filed a brief in the case before the supreme court. they said "the statutory standard of reasonable suspicion of on lawful present in the u.s. will produce a focus on minorities, specifically latinos" instead of laws like this, we need practical

solutions to fix or broken system. i could not agree with my colleague more. congress needs to face its responsibility to pass immigration reform. 11 years ago, introduced the dream act. this legislation would allow a select group of immigrants who grew up in this country, came here as infants and children, it would give them a chance to earn their way to citizenship. by attending college or serving in the military. 11 years. we have been struggling to pass this for 11 years. we have had majority votes but never the number we need to pass it. the best way i have said to my colleagues, to understand what the dream and is about is to get to meet the young people who would qualify for this legislation. as senator rubio has said, let us not -- let us let these young

people get right with their parents get wrong. these people call themselves dreamers. these young people, under the law sb1070, these people would be targets for prosecution and incarceration. why? beyond reasonable suspicion. they have said that we are undocumented. we are dream students. we want a chance to become american citizens. under the dream act, they would be future citizens who would make our country better place. i want you to meet six targets of this bill, the era's on immigration law. each and every one of them is a resident of arizona. they're telling their stories. they are now begging for a chance to earn their way to legal status and citizenship. the first graduated from arizona

state university with a bachelor's degree in electrical engineering. she co-founded the arizona dream and coalition, an organization of more than 200 students. last week, she was named one of 100 most influential people in the world by "time" magazine. she is a target of the law. the next is the president of the use of buyer 3 commission in her hometown -- the youth advisory commission in her hometown. she graduated with a 3.9 gpa. she is a sophomore at a university in california. she would be a target of thea immigration -- arizona immigration law. in high school, he was a leader in the air force junior rotc. in 2010, he graduated from arizona state university with a

degree in aeronautical engineering. since graduation, he has put his life on hold. he can not enlist in our military or work in the aerospace industry. he is a target of the arizona immigration law. jose graduated as vella victorian. at arizona state university, he ranked fifth in the nation for speech and debate. in 2008, he graduated summa cum laude with a major in business management. later this year, he will graduate from baylor university law school in waco, texas. he cannot be licensed to practice law in the u.s. because he has no country. he is a target of the arizona immigration law. finally, meat angelica hernandez. in high school, she served in the junior rotc and was

president of the national honor society. last year, she graduated from arizona state university as the outstanding senior in the mechanical engineering department. she is a target of the arizona immigration law. unlike the arizona immigration law, the dream that is a solution to a serious problem which treats these young people and thousands of others in a humane and just way. sb1070 would harm on force and encourage racial profiling, going after the very people -- law-enforcement and encourage racial profiling, going after the very people you just met. it is not consistent with our constitutional values. thank you. >> thank you, senator durbin. we will turn to our panelists. their statements will be read into the record.

we will let each of them make a statement. russell pearce, the president of band amnesty now -- banamnestynow.com. he was a former president of the arizona state senate. the key is most widely known as the author of sb1070, a law was constitutionality is being decided by the supreme court. he was originally elected to the arizona house and represented the senate. he also served as the director of arizona's motor vehicle division, the director of highway safety, and was a desperate -- a deputy. there is also a u.s. senator from 1997 -- 1977 to 1995.

he was an attorney. the chief prosecutor and civil attorney for the county and school districts within that tucson border area. he currently serves as a partner in the law firm -- in a law firm with offices in tucson, phoenix, and washington, d.c. steve go largo is a member of the arizona state senate. he served in the house of representatives from 2003 to 2009. he has served on numerous state and local boards and committees and is the leading sponsor of the state senate bill that would repeal sb1070. todd land freed is the executive director of arizona employers for immigration reform. this organization comprises 400 small medium and large businesses committed to federal immigration. his organization filed a brief with the u.s. supreme court in

opposition to sb1070. your entire statements will be read into the record. we will first call on mr. pierce. you may proceed. >> good morning. i am the author and driving force behind sb1070. it is overwhelmingly supported by citizens across this nation. thank you for inviting me here in before this honorable committee. it is an honor for me to be here. the illegal alien problem is a critical issue across the nation. in the -- is a ripple effect. we must begin by remembering that we are a nation of law. we must encourage the laws that protect the integrity of our borders and the rights of our citizens.

all law enforcement agents have the legal authority and moral obligation to uphold our laws, just like sheriff joe. the invasion of illegal aliens we face today, convicted felons, drug cartels, human traffickers, even terrorists. they pose the greatest threat to our nation terms of political and national security. during the debate of sb1070, a friend of mine was murdered on the border by an illegal alien. i have attended the funerals of citizens murdered by illegal aliens. i have a son who was wounded in a line of duty in a gunbattle with an illegal alien. i was critically wounded and shot in the chest. i have seen the cost in damage caused by the illegal aliens. the annual cost of the illegal immigration problem in arizona

is $2.6 billion. that is just to educate, medicate, incarcerate. those numbers do not reflect the cost of crimes. the terrorist attacks on september 11, 2001 highway bill link between immigration law enforcement and terrorism. -- highlight the link between the immigration law enforcement's and terrorism. the failure to enforce laws was instrumental in the deaths of 3000 people on that tragic day in america. under federal law, policies are illegal. the obama administration does not adopt illegal policies. it chooses to sue arizona for enforcing a law protecting its citizens and protecting jobs for local residents and protecting the taxpayers and the citizens of this republic in attempting

to secure our borders. during my 11 years in arizona, i have protected the state of arizona from adverse effects of illegal immigration and upheld the rule of law. these bills include voter i.d. at the polls. in 2006, a constitutional amendment denying bond to aliens who commit crimes. that was passed by 70% of the voters. 60% were hispanic. in 2006, citizens cannot see impunity, passed by 75%. in two dozen 7, protecting the american jobs and honest employers by mandating the use of verification for every business. i am proud to say that each of these initiatives have become law and survive the various legal challenges. in fact, the last time i was in

washington, the supreme court upheld the law against the yen patriotic challenge of the chamber and the obama administration. because most provisions of sb1070 are in effect, the citizens of arizona are safer. according to phoenix law enforcement association, which represents the police officers -- sense sb1070, phoenix has experienced a 30-year low crime rate. 600 police vacancies, budget cuts, and all strategy's did not bring about these falling crime rates. sb1070 did. the deterrence factor of this legislation brought about was clearly instrumental in our unprecedented drop in crime. all of this was without a single civil rights rachel profiling or bias complaint. simply put, sb1070 works. arizona has acted within its authority. the supreme court has held the state can utilize their ability

to enforce laws. sb1070 directs arizona law enforcement officers to cooperate and communicate with federal authorities requiring -- regarding federal laws in imposing penalties for noncompliance. this law is within the authority of arizona. it opposed the rule of law in protecting citizens. that is the highest duty of any public official. thank you. god bless. may god continue to bless this republic. >> thank you. next, we go to the senator. >> thank you very much for the opportunity to address this very important issue. not only to my home state of the arizona, but to our nation. the constitutionality and prudence of federal immigration

laws is a complex issue. i am a native of arizona. i grew up in that state. i came from neighborhoods and businesses and law practice with a multitude of hispanic and mexican friends. investors, what have you. we shared each other's irritate and experience. -- each other's heritage and experience. there is a rich latino influence. during the last two years, we have unduly harmed our legal latino residents in this process. the solution of the problem coming into this country illegally. we have let rhetoric and political advantage cloud this judgment. mr. chairman, this hearing is about sb1070, seeing that the supreme court will address this tomorrow. i believe is ill founded, mean-

spirited, divisive, it ended require state and local law enforcement to carry on immigration responsibilities that lie with the federal government. prior to being elected to the senate, in 1970, i was an attorney. i was appointed by governor rau castro to head up the drug control district because of the tremendous problem we had a one or border. this creation of this district did not create laws that contradict the federal responsibility. it was a cooperative effort put together by the legislature to address the problem in concordance -- accordance with the cooperation of the federal agencies. we did that. i bring this up because there are similarities. laws need to be in cooperation and not hostile to each other. when i came to the senate, i was appointed to this committee on

appropriations. there is traditions. i focused law and resources on the u.s. southwest border. along with my many colleagues at the time, including some not from border states, like alan simpson. we worked an effort. i participated as a member of the select committee and commission on immigration and refugee policy. along with my friend strom thurmond. the committee issued a report in 1981 which led to the passage of a comprehensive immigration reform bill during president reagan's administration. let me remind everyone that president reagan supported that bill. he set a date to grandfather those in this country who were here illegally with a pathway to citizenship if they did not have a criminal record. i continue to work hard to see

that this happens and the course. many ask why our efforts did not work with back in 1981. there is an answer. we did not secure the borders. even though we passed comprehensive immigration reform. a former senator and i added your marks -- earmarks, money not in the budget, and often it was taken out. for other reasons. at the time, the effort of congress and the public was not bear on this problem. when i left the senate, the number of border patrols had increased from 4000 in 1995 and now it is well over 21,000. with over 5000 on the arizona border. the federal government has not done its job in insuring border security -- there are wrong.

i was in congress and i can tell you the federal government, in recent years, has made heroic efforts to secure our borders. it started under the previous administration. a republican administration. it continues now with such programs as secure communities. we are called here today to debate america, the constitutionality of sb1070. i believe is unconstitutional for many of the reasons the chairman mentioned. having worked with law enforcement, i know this law puts law-enforcement in a tenable position. police officers are trained to profile behavior. behavior, not people. this what does the opposite. it profiles people. if you have brown skin in my state, you are going to be asked to prove your citizenship. the law as bad consequences. let me play the flip here.

talkingell you what i'm about. this was taken just a few days after the bill passed both houses and write before the governor cited. will you play the clip, please? >> good evening. a controversial illegal immigration bill is not even in law yet but one valley couple says that did not matter. the man claims he was targeted for his race and force to provide his birds cert. here is the story. >> the husband is a commercial truck driver who was pulled over at a check stop. he was asked to show his documents. he handed over his vehicles driver's license and provided his social security number. apparently, that was not enough. >> he came back and he said he needed my birth certificate.

i said, it is in my house. >> that is when officers handcuffed him, placed him in a van and transported him to the immigration and customs enforcement building in phoenix. >> i cannot imagine what he felt. being put in a vehicle. like he was a criminal. >> his wife said she was contacted and told to retrieve his birth certificate. she asked the agent why her husband had been detained and was told -- >> because he did not -- he stated that his mother is in mexico. i estimate it is a crime for his mother to be in mexico. he said it is not that he thought it would be suspicious. >> she left work and drove an hour back to the city where she retrieved and her documents. he was born in fresno, california. in 90 minutes, she walked up to the building, he was released.

relieved to be out of that building, the two of them still remain baffled at the encounter. >> i do not think this is correct. if i have to take my birth certificate with me all the time. i do not think that is correct. >> we can be stab at any time and we have to bring the certificates with us. -- be stopped any time and we have to bring the certificates with us. i do not think it is good to live in fear even though we are illegal. -- legal. ." >> thank you for looking at this. this may have been unintended consequences but this is happening. this is not just one example. let me give you one more quick one. some political leaders say that as a direct result of undocumented people coming into our state, horrific crimes have been caused such as beheadings

in the desert. terrorists are sneaking in. there is no proof. these examples turned out to be totally false, including those made by our governor, who had to retract them about the beheadings found in the desert. this demonstrates how political this issue has become. is not about creating law enforcement solutions 2 secure our border. those with criminal records. this law is a minor percentage of those who commit the crimes. i could go on and tell you a lot about the stories because i have talked to a lot of different people. finally, let me ask who is the target of sb1070? if anyone tells you it is only the drug and gun trafficking criminals, they are mistaken. sb1070 targets those with brown skin.

in my state, those are my neighbors, my friends, successful business associates. i have been in law enforcement in the senate -- and the senate when we could fix this law. we fixed part of it. sb1070 now -- now, sb1070 is causing a problem. as a legislature, i know. whenever you mix politics and law enforcement, you create a toxic environment. that is what has happened to my state of arizona. thank you. i apologize for being longer than anticipated. >> no problem. thank you. we hear from senator delauro. >> thank you. mr. chairman, members, i am a state senator from arizona representing district 13. it is my privilege to have the opportunity to give my perspective regarding sb1070.

sb1070 has perpetuated a climate of fear and division within the state of arizona. sb1070 has done arizona a great disservice and has done nothing to secure the borders or resolve any of our immigration problems. arizona law has unfortunately been subject to racial profiling and harassment. the following situations will illustrate how senate bill 1070 negatively affects latinos. sb1070 has created racial tensions and distrust between latinos and law-enforcement, as well as latinos and non-latino neighbors. the tragic death of a united states citizen who was murdered in the front of his home by his neighbor just 13 days after governor bruce were signed sb1070.

racial slurs were yelled. go back to mexico. if you don't, you will die. before long, he pointed -- he died in front of his home. he leaves a wife and daughter. sb1070 made latinos targets of criminals because latinos are less likely to report crimes for fear of having themselves supported or even a loved one deported. many women face nightmare situations if they are victims of domestic violence because sb1070 places them in a position where they cannot report their abuser in fear of getting deported. in some cases, they are held hostage in their own homes. mr. chairman, no woman should ever be placed in harm's way. sb1070 has shifted the priorities of law enforcement to focus attention away from

criminal investigation in place it squarely on law-enforcement immigration enforcement. this comes at the expense of murder victims. most recently, the sheriff's office has come under fire for the failure to investigate to 400 sexual assault cases. many of them involved children. the sheriff's office focused attention on immigration enforcement. sb1070 has fostered and legitimized vigilante movement responsible for violence and lethal attack on latinos. here is another example. the case of a nine-year-old girl and her father were killed. all members of the defense organization in arizona -- they were murdered in their own home

while they were being robbed. the girl pleaded for help and was shocked -- shot. if sb1070 has been successful, it has broken up families by separating hard-working immigrant parents from their children and limiting the success of our latino students. these parents and children live in fear every day. fear of being separated from each other. it is a common practice for parents to teach their children the phone number of a family member that they can trust in the event that parents leave. mr. chairman, the state of arizona has a with a lot of anti-immigration type legislation. the most recent was in initiative that preceded sb1070, requiring undocumented students to pay out-of-state tuition.

the dream that has been a dream. i use my robotics team. as school team that has beaten teams all over the world, including the massachusetts institute of technology. if it was not for their status, the students would have unlimited promises. unfortunately, laws like sb1070 pander to a climate of fear and a vision that run rampant through the state of the arizona. mr. chairman, this fear has created -- this year is created for a purpose. sb1070's intentions are to make second-class citizens of u.s. latinos. to discourage them from voting. going to school. seeking employment. and realizing the american dream. immigration enforcement is only secondary objective by their own admission, the offices intent to

harass immigrants, to create a miserable environment so that immigrants will choose to sell off the port. they show no record for the sole rights of the use of u.s. latinos citizens. -- for the civil rights of the use of the u.s. latino citizens. sb1070 is neither an immigration policy nor a legal position, but a campaign of harassment, intimidation, directed on the person's complexion. the prime sponsor of sb1070 will try to give you some rationale for the chaos of this legislation. however, i submit to you that any effort to justify profiling or oppression of anyone is un- american, illegal, and unconstitutional. mr. chairman, i pray to --

i put emphasis on passing comprehensive immigration reform, specifically the priority of passing the dream act for the students across this great country. mr. chairman, these are my comments. i respectfully submit them. >> thank you. >> thank you, mr. chairman, for inviting me to speak. i am the executive director of arizona employers for immigration reform. our industry has approximately 400 business members. we are not open borders. we are not addicted to cheap labor. we know there are problems on the border and lives are being affected. the issue needs to be addressed. businesses want legal access to

the labor it needs when it needed from wherever it must come from with little government interaction. most importantly, we want you in congress to solve the problem. my remarks will focus on whether it was like sb1070 and others are good public policy based upon their impact on business and the economy. my public policy -- what are the outcomes? did they secure the border? reduce expenses? for fill their promises? it is a legitimate question. especially when program accountability is so important. what is wrong with holding state level immigration laws to the same scrutiny? in my testimony, i have shown that the attrition has been tried before at the city county and state level going back to 2006. what has come from these? nothing good. unless your only goal is to make brown people move. after oklahoma passed a bill in 2007, the bankers association

found a loss of 90,000 on authorize orders resulted in a $1.9 billion loss. the year and industry -- the urban institute found negligible savings from the departure of the undocumented because they are ineligible for the benefits and the first place. a georgia restaurant survey found that 71% of members have labor shortages and estimated the average sales losses due to a labor shortage was $21,000 per store. georgia farmers told the governor they needed the 11,000 workers to bring in that spring's fruit crops. the governor offered probation as the solution and 11 people showed up. one week later, there were seven left. the losses farmer is encountered in 2011 was $391 billion. one analyst said we have turned good workers into criminals and criminals into bed workers. losing on both ends of the deal. exactly.

alabama is rethinking their law. 25% of the construction workers that left the state with few replacements. it sounds like the sales tax revenue was lost. stay with losses in state income are estimated to be between $56,000,000.200 $64 million. arizona continues to suffer. total losses from cancellations in bookings for conferences and tourism. $394 million and a loss of 42 -- 4236 jobs. there was a chart in the back of my written testimony that highlights those losses. foreign businesses and executives refuse to work in arizona. the loss of 150,000 consumers from the economy resulted in an estimated decline in gross state product of $24.4 billion. the loss of 291,000 direct jobs and result in tax revenue of $2.1 billion.

do these sound like the effects of a good law? we were told that the law would bolster the economy and create jobs. history demonstrates the opposite. if these laws or good, why are the impacts that? the answer is, you have bad outcomes because you have that input. we are being misled by proponents who retained the lead to store data coming exaggerate, and make it up. you heard testimony about how it is supposedly costing arizona $2.6 billion to educate and incarcerate illegal aliens. that is not the whole story. it ignores financial contributions these workers make to the economy. economics that is considering both sides showed immigrants benefit $1 million to arizona. 17% of the prisons are illegal immigration's -- immigrants, when it is impossible to know because the department of

corrections combines inmates here legally. the latest numbers 13.2%. the population must be lower. because of sb1070, crime and phoenix is low. there are no data pieces to back that up. that fact was reiterated this morning. mr. chairman, nearly every statistic used to justify sb1070 has serious factual problems. newspaper fact check researchers found that nine out of 10 immigration stance they checked including some you heard today are not the whole truth. i encourage you to look at the reports and data i provided to the committee and educate yourself on the real facts. i am not saying all of the concerns are illegitimate or there are no cost. no one questions the issues of drugs. no one questions the security threats. no one denies there is an immigration problem. we agree on all of this. should we spend our time looking

at solutions that might work rather than on one we know that does not? if you ask the question, what else do you have? with this history of failure, it amazes me that sb1070 was the best idea. maybe it is because no other solutions were allowed to be discussed. there are some great ideas for solving this problem but you do not get to hear them because we are spending too much time arguing about sb1070. we will discuss these may first starting at 10:00 a.m.. we have invited all members of congress. we hope your staff will attend. this fixation on sb1070 as some kind of viable solution, when we know better, is crazy. the supreme court's's decision does nothing to change the fact that it remains that policy and that law. congress can and must do something. the solution must deal with the man for labor as well as border security.

nothing else will work. thank you, mr. chairman and members for your time. >> thank you. i would like to thank all of our panelists. we begin with questions. i will direct some first questions to mr. pearce. thank you for coming because we do not agree. that is obvious. you have had the courage and integrity to come here and defend your views. that is very much appreciated. ok. now, i am interested in trying to understand the general context behind the arizona law. you were on fox news on july 29, 2010. you said your intent in wirint sb1070 is "to take the handcuffs off law-enforcement. they will go home. they will solve the port." do you stand by that? >> yes. >> some have said that the arizona law is necessary because the federal government has not secure the border. to be clear, even if the border

were completely secure, and the government could show that no new people are entering the country illegally, you would still sb1070 to remain in effect to ensure that all of those who are already here without status either leave america or get apprehended? >> can i give better than a yes. >> as. >> it is the role of law. we have all kinds of laws. you never get 100% compliance. laws without consequences are not lost at all. i have heard misinformation. if everybody remembers the case in 2005 -- it struck down a decision about a fourth and 14th amendments of those who are here illegally and when you can ask and cannot. they said you can ask any time. they said you can ask any time.