basically, she was literally counting the days until she could be reunited with the love of her life. when you factor in her religious convictions, it is just another factor. >> we have two minutes left. a final question in virginia. had two wives. she passed away. i was wondering what the relationship was between martha washington and either of george mason's wives. >> they were friendly neighbors. as far as i know, they were never intimate friends. >> that friendship was a

political casualty. george mason 10 and george washington, who had been friends and collaborators and leading up to the revolution. after the constitutional convention, which washington sanctioned, it really spelled an end to their friendship. >> on twitter, someone said, quite the power couple. [laughter] what are the important things to know about the influence of martha washington? >> it is important to know how smart and powerful she was and how dependent he was on her. his achievements were his achievements. having her there with them made them much more possible. >> i think that is true. she defines it in a way that perhaps a temporary americans -- contemporary americans might

have a difficulty understanding. she was the most influential person in the face of europe -- in the face of europe. >> this is the biography of george washington's patriarch. a striking portrait of young marked on the cover. our partners for the entire series is the white house historical association. they have been helping with documentary ever in -- evidence. we get ready for the series and we say thanks as we finish up the first program. we have a group of academic advisers, and you will see many of them at the program progresses. we have a robust website with a lot of video. if we have flooded your appetite and you want to want -- learn more, c-span.org/firstladies.

thank you so much. ♪ ♪ >> next monday, a first lady

considered more modern for her time. she was outspoken about slavery and women's rights. she provides a window into colonial america and the life with john adams. she explored her triumphs -- we will explore her triumphs and tragedies. live next monday at 9:00 eastern on c-span, c-span radio, and c- span.org. our website has more about first ladies, including a special section, welcome to the white house, produced by our partner, the white house historical association, which chronicles life in the executive mansion. also, a special edition of the book, including a biography and portrait of both -- of the first

ladies, and from michelle obama. now belt -- now available for the discounted price of $12.95 for -- plus shipping and handling. >> c-span, created by american's cable companies in 1979 and brought to you as a public service by your television provider. >> the national governors association wrapped up a winter meeting monday in washington with a stop at the white house to hear from president obama. in about 40 minutes, the governors here from a tv personality, dr. oz, about the importance of healthy living. ben bernanke will be on capitol hill tomorrow morning to deliver the semiannual monetary policy report. live coverage of his testimony before the senate banking committee will be on c-span 3 at

10:00 eastern. >> all the founders' primary concerns, number one, with national security. what would they say, for example, about a company? based on how they acted in other instances, they would have savored a bailout because the supply -- a supply united states with their fighter jets. you can make an argument they would have supported the bailout of chrysler back in the 1980's. what is the difference? chrysler made tanks back then. they were our only tank manufacturer. it is interesting and class -- when chrysler comes out of debt and repays a government loan and

comes back to help, the main way they do so is by selling off the tank division and plowing the money back into the company. >> larry will take your calls, e-mails, and facebook posts, and tweets. live sunday at noon eastern. governorsion's wrapped up their annual winter meeting monday. hearing from president obama and vice president biden at the white jack, if you had done that, i

that, i would be introducing you here. thank you but all, very, very much. you are all much more disciplined than the place that i lived for 36 years up on the hill. you run ahead of schedule. the president is with me. thank you for being here. we have a lot to work on, from fixing a broken immigration system to rebuilding our nation's infrastructure to this new word everyone in america is learning about, "sequester." this town, unlike maybe your capitols, is i hope temporarily frozen and not stopped in intense partisanship, the likes of which i have only seen the last couple of years in my career. but you know, the american people move in different ways. and thank you to my wife last night.

we disagreed on some things. i think the american people have been moved. they know the possibilities for this country are immense. they are no longer traumatized by what was it traumatizing event, the great collapse of 2008. they are no longer worried about our economy being overwhelmed by europe at large or china somehow swallowing up every bit of innovation that exists in the world. they are no longer worried about our economy being overwhelmed beyond our shores. there is very little doubt in any circles about america's ability to be in a position to lead the world in the 21st century.

not only in terms of foreign policy, but economically. the american people are ready to get up as a civil-rights leader. the american people are tired of being tired. they're ready to get up and move. we are in a good position to lead the world. that is why i think they're so frustrated by what they see and what they don't see here in washington. their frustration is turning into anger. i found an interesting dynamic. whether it was a democrat or republican governor i heard from

several of you how do you deal with this? how do you deal with the congress. no distinction, but how you deal with this? you deal with legislatures that are split. you represent a minority party. you get on very well. the accomplish things in your home state. that is the way it used to work and we can make it work that way again. there are a number of things we have to do immediately. we may disagree on how to dress them but not the need for them to be addressed. each of you are making different decisions you are grappling with it.

i do not think there is much much difference. i'm not mad a governor from the time of implementing the recovery act and on now who does not think we have to do something about our infrastructure. there is very little disagreement on the need too build an education that has such immense possibilities for our people. most of these issues were united by more than what divides us. these all intersect at a place where both the state and federal governments engage. we are going to have to work together. they overlap, in many cases. we will have our differences. we should all agree that the united states has to have the highest percentage of college

graduates of any nation in the world. everyone disagrees. some of you governors have led the way an early education and the consequences for the prospect of success. you have all led in knowing that we have to have a reform of our high school system so we end not only finding it that way for people that will go to four year but there is so much agreement that we ought to be able to get a fair amount done. we should all agree that to grow our economy we have to invest in manufacturing, infrastructure, clean energy, education. the

question is who is to invest and how much. there's not much disagreement about the need. i've never met a democrat or a republican u.s. been a governor who does not think the american people should have a sense that hard work will be rewarded. the work party have an opportunity. i do not know of any men and women that are a better living example of that and all be sitting in front of me. we all use the phrase move forward in a balanced way. one man's balance is another man's imbalance. that is what we have got to talk about. the one thing i do not think any of the lack is a vision about how great this country can be. we ought to be able to reassert ourselves in a way that we own the 21st century. i know the guy i am about to introduce believes that but you do.

let me introduce you to my friend, barack obama.[applause] [applause] >> thank you. have a seat. thank you. welcome. thank you for being here. we all have a lot on our plate. everything from our immigration system to our education system. as joe said, our goal is to make sure that we can be an effective partner with you. i want to thank the members of my cabinet who are here and members of the administration. i want to thank jack and mary for their leadership.

i want to say thank you for being on your best behavior last night. i was told nothing was broken and no silverware was missing. i did not get any calls from neighbors about the noise. i cannot speak for joe's after party. i heard that was wild. i always enjoy this weekend. as leaders we share responsibility to do whatever we can to help grow our economy and create good middle-class jobs and open up new doors of opportunity for our people. that is our true north. it will guide every decision we make every level. we should be asking ourselves three questions every day. how do we make america a magnet for good jobs, how do we equip our people with the skills to get those jobs and how we make sure if they get those jobs that their hard work actually pays off. as governors, you are the ones who are on the ground, seeing firsthand every single day what

works and what does not work. that is what makes you so indispensable. when you ran for office, it is one thing that unites all of you. that is the last thing you want to see is washington get in the way of progress. in just four days congress is poised to allow a series of arbitrary budget cuts ticket then that will slow our economy, eliminate good jobs and leave a lot of folks who are thinly stretched scrambling to figure out what to do. this morning you received a report outlining exactly how these cuts will harm middle- class families in your state. thousands of teachers and educators will be laid off. tens of thousands of parents will have to deal with finding

child care for their children. hundreds of thousands will lose access to primary care and preventive care like flu vaccinations. tomorrow i will be in the tidewater region of virginia where workers will sit idle when they ought to be repairing ships. a carrier should be deploying for the persian gulf. the uncertainty is already having an effect. companies are preparing layoff notices. families are preparing to cut back on expenses. the longer in place, the bigger the impact. what you are in town, i hope that you speak with your congressional delegation and remind them exactly what is at stake and exactly who is at risk. because here is the thing. these cuts do not have to happen.

congress can turn them off any time with just a little bit of a compromise. democrats need to acknowledge that we will make modest reforms in medicare if we want the program there for future generations and if we hope to maintain our ability. i have made this commitment. it is reflected in proposals i made last year. it will be reflected in my budget. i stand by those remarks for smart spending cuts. we need republicans to adopt the same approach to tax reform that speaker john boehner champion championed two months ago. under our concept of tax reform and nobody's rates would go up. we would be able to reduce the deficit by making some tough, smart spending cuts in getting rid of tax loopholes that benefit the well off and the well-connected.

sometimes folks in congress think that compromise is a bad word. they figure they will pay a higher price at the polls for working on the other side. as governors, some of you know that compromise is essential to getting things done. so is prioritizing. making smart choices, that is how gov. o'malley put it on track to all but eliminate the deficit while keeping tuition down and making maryland's public schools among the best in america five years running. that is how the governor balance his budget last year was still investing in key areas like education for tennessee's children.

they know we cannot just cut our way to prosperity. cutting alone is not an economic prosperity. you have to make the tough choices to cut what we do not need so we can invest in the things we do need. let me highlight two examples. the first is infrastructure. this should be a no-brainer. the schools are falling apart. it is what i have to do the best with transportation and communications networks to their businesses and customers. i proposed fix it first. i talked about this in my state of the union address. to put people to work right now like the structurally deficient bridges across the country.

i also proposed a proposal that attracts private capital to upgrade what our businesses need most. modern ports to move our goods. modern schools that are worthy of our children. i know some people oppose any idea i put forward. rebuilding infrastructure is not my idea. it is everybody's idea. it is what built this country. a democrat in oregon has made clean energy structure a top priority. folks who think spending really is the biggest problem should be more concerned than anybody about improving our infrastructure right now. we're talking about deferred maintenance. we know we will have to spend the money.

the longer we wait, the more it'll cost. that is a fact. the wyoming state address stated that failing to maintain our roads is not a plan for being fiscally conservative. it is true all across the united states. we could be putting folks back to work right now. we know contractors are begging for work. they will come on time and under budget which never happened. we could make a whole lot of practice right now on things we know we're going to have to do at some point. it is like fixing a row for a broiler that is broken. one of the biggest hurdles that you face when it comes to fixing infrastructure is red tape. oftentimes that comes out in washington. sometimes we shave months and

even years off the timeline. we're setting up regional teams that will focus on some of the unique needs each of you have in various parts of the country. we're going to help the pacific northwest to a faster and renewable energy projects. we will help the northeast corridor faster on high-speed rail service. we will help the midwest and we will help the midwest and other states like colorado move faster on projects that help farmers deal with worsening drought. we will help states like north and south dakota move faster on oil and gas production. all of these projects will get more americans back to work faster. we can do even more if we can get congress to act. the second prayer someone to the second priority i will talk about his education. particular education the start

of the earlier stage. i want to partner with each of you to make high-quality preschool available to every child in america. this is an area where we have already seen great bipartisan work at the state level. i was just in georgia because they are making it a priority to fix this. kids that are poor are leveling up. everybody is seeing a real improvement because it is high- quality, early childhood education. studies show the sooner children begin to learn in these high- quality settings the better he or she does down the road. we all end of saving money. most middle-class parents cannot afford a few hundred dollars a week in additional income for these kinds of preschool programs.

poor kids who need it most lack access. that lack of access impacts their lives. every dollar we invest can save more later on. this is a priority in alabama. gov. schneider's making it a priority in michigan. gov tomlin has made it in west virginia. even in a time of tight budgets, republicans and democrats are focused on high-quality, early childhood education. we want to make sure we can be an effective partner. we should be able to do that for every child everywhere, democrat, republican, blue state, red state.

all of us want our kids to graduate high school, hold a job and have stable families. that will be better for every state. it will be better for this country. that is what high-quality early trotted education can deliver. i hope you are willing to part with us to make that happen. let me close with this. there are always going to be areas where we have some genuine disagreement. here in washington and in your respective states. there are more areas where we can do a lot more cooperating then i think we have seen over the last several years. to do that this town has to get past its obsession with focusing on the next election instead of the next generation. all of us are concerned about our politics both in our own parties as well as the other parties. at some point we have to do some governing.

certainly what we cannot do is keep careening from one manufactured crisis to another crisis. the american people have dug long and hard to get out of one crisis. they are meeting their response abilities. they are giving it their all. a lot of you are doing the same things in your respective states. we have the same kind of attitude here in washington. the american people have a right to expect that. it is not just to shrink in our economy for the short-term but to reignite what has always been the central premise of america's economic engine. that is that we build a stronger thriving middle-class where if you work hard in this country, no matter who you are or what you look like, you can make it. you can succeed. that is our goal. i know that is the goal of all

of you as well. i look forward to our partnering. with that, i want to do is clear out the press so we can take some questions. alright? thank you. [applause] >> ok. i am governor jack markell, of delaware. i serve as the chair of the national governors' association, joined by other governors. we had what i believe that a productive conversation with the president. he heard from governors of both parties about their concerns about the sequester and about their concerns about the effect on the economies in our states. the president shares those concerns.

we talked about other issues related largely about the economy. his belief that continuing investments in infrastructure are incredibly important, something that each of us in our own states can very much acknowledge, because we know we cannot have a strong economy going forward if we do not have a strong infrastructure. we talked about everything from marketplace fairness as a tax issue to workforce funds, where so many of us find we are spending so much time to put people to work in our states. it is one of the most frustrating conversations we have with the businesses in our states who say they have vacancies, but not people with the right skills. we are determined to make sure we have not only the resources, but flexibility to put people back to work. there was conversation about offshore oil exploration, offshore wind development,

conversations about health care and medicaid waivers. the governor of oregon talked about some of the interesting work going on in oregon as well. also, as part of the conversation, the president talked about what he can do to speed up permits and an indication on the part of governors to work with him to make sure the federal and state governments are working together to compress timeframes, because as long as businesses are waiting in line, we are not putting people to work. just a general frustration that a number of governors expressed about the states being heard, by some of the inaction in washington. governor herbert of the utah talked about reduction that he

had been making in terms of his own economic growth projections as a result of inaction here in washington. it was a productive conversation. the president talked for 10 minutes at the beginning, he took about an hour of questions from the governors of both parties. as always, these are helpful conversations and a commitment on the part of the governors and the president alike to keep working on the behalf of the people of our states and our country. i will turn this over to governor fallin and then take questions, and maybe some other governors will step in and answer questions as well. i will introduce the governors who are here. >> we appreciate the president, the vice president, and his administration giving us time to talk about important issues facing our nation. we think it is important governors have a seat at the table, because we are home

dealing with our local economies, budgets, unique challenges as circumstances that each of our states face, and it is important governors get input as to how we can solve some of the problems facing our nation. frankly, we believe we are great laboratories for democracies and efficiencies. we have had to close budget gaps. also, balance our budget spirit we understand that there are going to be cuts to get our deficit under control, which we think is in an important issue, not only for national security, but economic security, but how do we get to that point? that is why we're here in washington this week in a bipartisan way, and we are here to make the point that the sequester is a very serious issue for our nation. it has a tremendous effect upon our ability as governors to talk about our important priorities and budgets.

i have introduced my budget for our state. we have started on our legislative session. as we put decisions off, with sequester, whether the debt ceiling, whether the continuing resolution on our budgeted, those decisions will be our decisions to be able to decide about important programming, and it creates so much uncertainty in our businesses in our workplace that it affects our job creation and economic recovery. we are hoping we can find common ground on issues that we can work on together. we have asked the president for flexibility, not to shift those costs down to the states, and if there are cost savings on the federal side, give us cost savings on the stateside, and help us with the unfunded mandates.

>> two other points. on the sequester, while it is clear there are lots of specific programs which will be impacted as a result in constituencies in our states, whether special ed or people getting substance abuse treatment, many vulnerable populations were a significant focus in the conversation. the impact on the overall economy, what it could mean in terms of joblessness and the like. i want to make that point. governor fallin joined the issue of flexibility, and the president was very clear. what he said was he is into flexibility, but also committed to making sure some of the goals for these programs are still achieved. as a example of the flexibility, to stop providing care to people, something that he philosophical cannot accept

and also oftentimes not in compliance with the law, and to the extent that different states can come up with different ways of doing things it is something he is interested in. before we take questions, we have governor jindal, governor nixon, governor o'malley from maryland, we have governor malloy of connecticut, governor walker from wisconsin, as well as governor fallin and myself. >> i want to ask you about how bad you think the sequester will be, is the white house exaggerating its impact, and a specific question to governor fallin --

the white house has put out a statement that in the state of oklahoma they say that 1,490 fewer children will receive vaccinations, and i'm wondering if that is a part of a cut of $102,000. would you be able to find somewhere else in your budget to make sure those children will get vaccinated? >> i have not had a chance to get a copy of the report. i'm anxious to see the report. there will be an effect by sequester if it goes to the way it is written for the state of oklahoma. i have included $40 million more into my health care priority and put a huge emphasis on infant mortality and how we can prevent infant mortality in our state. also $16 million more for crisis intervention for our families and systems to care for our family for help. i have a big push for health improvement of health in our

state. i call it an oklahoma plan to address the needs of our citizens. that is something that is important us, taking care of the health of our citizens. as far as the sequester, we predict in oklahoma if it goes through the way it is written, because we have five military installations, we could see up to 8,000 jobs cut in military and defense-related jobs and spending, and that would have a trickle-down effect throughout our economy, that would make the cost to us 20,000 jobs. there will be an effect in oklahoma. >> would you not let a cut of $102,000 keep kids from getting vaccinated? >> i have not seen the report to know if that is accurate, but what i am telling you i have already put in extra money into my state to make sure we take care of the health of our children and health of our citizens. >> it is important to point out these facts and figures, this is not editorialized, and if you are a kid the who is not going to be in head start, somebody who is getting substance abuse

treatment and is not getting it any longer, that is not an exaggeration. what the administration has done is to put out not just the numbers, but to put a face on the potential impacts. i know you wanted to hear from a couple of other governors. >> we just visit washington, we do not live by these rules. we try to find solutions. we are not in complete agreement exactly how the congress of the united states should resolve this problem, but we understand they have got to resolve this problem. putting 750,000 people out of work does not make a lot of sense when our states are making comebacks and starting to add people. the idea that oklahoma would lose 8,000 jobs if we have a multiple effect is playing itself out in all our jurisdictions.

what we have said and some people say may be for more cuts or all cuts, but really what we're saying is let's get the job done. work with the president, but to get it done, or turn it over to us governors and we will negotiate it. >> with jobs, are you seeing a different set of spending cuts? >> that is a fair question you're asking. the accumulated deficit has decreased at a more rapid rate than the last three years than at any time in our history. we're starting to see jobs created in this nation on a state-by-state basis. i will ask a different question. is our job to kill the economy or build on the future? if we get this economy going, the deficits will go down a lot more rapidly than if we play these games and cause the economy to lose 750,000 jobs. this is what they need to do, to get out of that box that sits under the dome and understand this has real applications in people's lives.

they should stop playing around with it and get the job done. they should compromise to get the job done. >> [indiscernible] >> estimates it is half a point to a point of gdp. you have seen it, i have seen it. 750,000 jobs, many of those in the defense industry, where it is already dropping. you saw what the impact was on the last quarter of last year. you hit that industry again this rapidly, 750,000 jobs is an understatement. >> governor walker, how will your state weather this if it goes through? >> the one thing that is, is something the president mentioned in his comments to the public or the media when he was with us, and that is the concern we have about the arbitrary

nature of the cuts. that is probably why, when the president proposed and congress approved the sequester concept back in 2011, their hope was that ultimately these cuts would be so bad that the president and congress would ultimately find some way to find an alternative. that day is upon us, and that more than anything is the one concern among democrats and republicans. there is some of us who think there are alternative cuts to the ones being proposed that are better, others that it is better to balance cuts along with tax increases, but in either case, those who say that taking more money out of the economy in terms of government spending is that raising taxes along with government spending cuts would have an equally if not greater impact on the economy, and an example of that is where have already started to see in our consumers having less money because of the payroll tax having gone up. a typical family in our state making $50,000 now has $1,000 more they pay in taxes.

that has an impact. we knew that going in. the federal reserve in new york said that was $710 less in spending. most people have tapped into their savings, and that is the last thing we want to do to the american consumers. it is a series of difficult choices. i hope is we see something better than the arbitrary cuts that are being proposed, and it's up to us that it does not cripple the economy at such a critical time. >> it is important to point out that the president's proposal is not about increasing rates, it is about closing loopholes. governor o'malley and other governors want to say something. >> i want to disagree with my colleague's statements. i want to echo what scott has said.

it is possible to cut less than 3% of the budget without causing a devastating consequence. you can achieve these reductions without jeopardizing children's access the vaccinations. you can achieve these kinds of reductions. the spending in the federal budget, it will be larger after these reductions than it was last year. there is a responsible way to cut less than 3% of the federal budget. it is time for the president to show leadership. it is time to send to congress a prioritized list of reductions that preserves critical services. every family out there has to balance their budget. every business has had to become more efficient, and the reality is it can be done. this administration has an insatiable appetite for new revenue. almost $6 trillion of new debt. almost $600 billion in new taxes in the most recent deal. it can be done without jeopardizing the economy and critical services. the president needs to stop campaigning, stop trying to scare states. every american knows they

believe there is a least 3% of the government spending that is wasteful, and they will tell you there is a way to cut the waste without cutting critical services. i make a suggestion that the president did not agree with. we considered to lengthen the new spending instead of cutting existing programs, for example, the medicaid programs. if these cuts are so important, why are we spending new dollars? i respectfully disagree. my sense was that he felt the election has consequences, and he felt that the majority, he was not open to having that conversation again. bottom line is you will hear a diversity of views. my perspective is you can cut 3% without consequences. the president needs to show leadership. >> we have a couple other

governors. >> he has more than enough revenues. >> one of the remarkable things we heard today was a broad-based agreement by all governors that we should not allow this arbitrary jobs-killing sequester to go through. we would not allow that to happen in our states, and we do not believe congress should allow that to happen here. compromise is something that allows us to make progress as a people, and all of the governors of both parties agreed that congress cannot allow these arbitrary sequester cuts to go through and hurt our economy and slow our recovery. there has got to be a better way. we have already found a way to reduce the deficit by $2.4 trillion, and the president has

shown the path forward on alternative ways to do that, including reducing and eliminating a lot of these loopholes, which the vast majority of americans believe are not as important as getting people back to work at keeping our economy recovering. over the life of the last four years of the obama administration, we have seen the smallest average annual percentage increases in spending of any president in modern times. we need a balanced approach. that is what makes our states move forward and create jobs, and that is what we need to do here. the other issue we agree on is without jobs there is no progress. i think all of us are calling on congress to come together to solve this problem and do it not in an arbitrary way, but in a way where we can compromise and save jobs and keep our economy moving foulard. >> hold on. >> [indiscernible]

by march 1? >> the president is very focused on doing everything we can so we can get past it, but there were no assurances that this would not take effect. >> governor -- >> is there any reason to be optimistic that these cuts could be avoided? >> our perspective is more clearly that folks in washington understand the implications on their constituents in their states. that will hopefully lead to the proper action, which is one reason what was shared with the governors today. another thing that is important is the likely economic impact beyond some of the specifics these constituents and these constituents, in terms of jobs. the cbo projected 750,000 fewer jobs.

thank you very much. >> thank you, everyone. >> earlier, at the national governors' association heard from dr. oz. this is 40 minutes. [applause] i live in new jersey. [laughter] my wife is from pennsylvania. i pay taxes everywhere. it is a great honor to talk a little bit today about eight theme that will interest many of you. it has huge budgetary implications. i had the great honor of spending a few hours with your spouse's yesterday.

they gave it -- it gave me a lot of intel. let me start off of a little bit of my background. i am a cardiac surgeon. i still practice medicine at columbia university. one of my special areas it is card replacement therapy. one of the things i have learned is you have to give people badness. what you learn to do is to give them bad news by telling them the truth. you also keep their respects at the same time. part of the mission i have for today is to give you some points that may be valuable. and still have them remember energetically that you were on the right path. this is my office. oftentimes, you kill lost in

that domain. i've been able to focus on a few things that might be able to pull us out of the children. state responsibility and personal responsibility meet right here. there are a lot of reasons i say that. the fundamental debate is the role of the state nurses the role of the individual. this is how many folks use their excess -- a view their citizens. but we try to get state involvement in try to put those pieces together, this is what it often looks like. we try to allow legislative solutions, we trip up as well. how'd you find that balancing act? it mandates that we understand a few principles about how we message the health information.

it is not as about medicine. it is about life. all of us -- there was always a leader and a healer. they played a role giving no place -- is a dull life. -- it is about life. none of us can expect to live in a healthy state. you cannot have true wealth if you are not healthy. i spend a lot of time with oprah. i did about 80 shows with her. i learned a few interesting insights. people do not change. they change what they do based on how they feel. we began to think differently about delivering certain

messages. the message has to be delivered with caring energy. it does matter to people how they hear the message. most imports in may, we have -- most importantly, we have to make it easy to do the right thing. the road torease success. the reason we automate our lives is because we do not want to spend that energy wastefully. it is not because people are foolish or misguided, it is our natural human desire not to let to reinvent the wheel every day. let me show you one slide on numbers. this is an estimate so this is to enact some of this environmental -- if you do not

have access to health care, he did not have a doctor, it is like having a ship full of oil. when the tanker rubs up against the coastline, that is expensive to clean up. it cost us a lot more. it costs us more because it is much more difficult to pick up the pieces when everything has come crumbling down. the red area is a major category. let's start with access. on the show, we have gone around the country in free screenings. dear barry affordable, at their sponsored by local facilities. -- they are very affordable. with that one simple mission for

the sale. to empower you to take control of your help. we try to accomplish that every day in the studio. each year, we also did the road to bring our message directly to you. the share, we launched our biggest program ever helping thousands of americans. this year, we have embarked on our most ambitious campaign yet. the treated a 15 minute physical -- we created a 15 minute simple. philadelphia, pittsburgh, washington, d.c., tampa, portland, and kansas city. going to need folks who are scared about finding out their numbers. we'll have to have them trust us.

>> your neighbor in need. >> i have been neglecting my health. all coming together to face their fears. when the day was over, 1000 people met with the doctor. taking charge of their health. these programs have been successful and i want to point out that almost everyone has insurance. i'm sorry, they have jobs. many times, they do not have insurance. in 15 minutes, it takes five members -- five minutes to give

you the numbers. for the rest of your life, you know lot more about the major drivers of longevity. their simple, elegant, and seamless. this is the amount of total tobacco that we use in this country. this is something many of the struggle with. this is how i talk about lung disease. when you tell a smoker to stop smoking, the reason it fails is because he reminding them how incompetent they are. you are reminding them how they

don't embarrass themselves. people who smoke got addicted and they weren't teens. you remind them of the fact they could not control their own destiny, so they get anxious and smoke. one thing ask was to make sure we did not have depressed people in the trial. we cannot find a single smoker who was not clinically depressed. the fundamental insight is -- you have to take a couple of different tax. you cannot hide from that. i 11:00, that is emphysema. that is pretty evident. when you see that, you have a visual awareness and understanding of why this matters to you.

there are certain times when you can change people's minds. as a heart surgeon, i do not have a lot of control. i pledged that would never operate on smokers. and i don't. when you come to see me, if you do not stop smoking, you do not value this process. i can work with you and we can get you to stop. doubt is our moment of change. people did not recognize the success rate is about 5% if you do it cold turkey. if you do would supportive appropriate mechanisms it is closer to 45%. smokers begin to think about it differently. you need to care about yourself as much as we care about you. that changes the dynamic.

the true cost is the cleveland clinic data. that is literally costs. forget about what is charged and how he has gained that. smoking increasing absenteeism and intelligence. they recognize they have these beliefs. people bond with smokers in the executive branch of their company -- company. we have to make it uncool to smoke and is a huge economic drain on the work force. not hiring smokers, it will reduce your health care budget

by 15%. once you have that camera, the question becomes, what are you going to do about it? it is uncomfortable conversation. it is in the cloud. they will not be allowed to smoke because it is too expensive to cover those costs. let me shift gears to another area. this is a major crisis. this is a modern version of what would happen to been crafted if you're gonna focus on that. let me start off but the ravages of obesity. this is an aorta. those are two kidneys. the kidney on the ride is robust

looking. you do not know this, by the way, your body only needs when kidney, but we see this as a sign of hardening of the arteries. let me bring this up in a different context. it happens in the male organ. it is happening in your brain. this is the major blood vessel. it starts to go when you are 25, 35, 45. now you have an open sore on the inside. your body has to feel that.

it forms saying scab. boom! you just witnessed the leading cause of death in your states. that might be intimidating initially. the good news, at the most common time for a hearty -- our debt is monday morning. -- the most common time for a heart attack is monday morning. it was the scab on top of the plaque. he began to appreciate that you control your destiny. what you have for lunch today and he's 5 with this afternoon can change the odds of you having a major cardiac crisis tomorrow. we can make a big dent in how we take care of folks. the major drivers of this are very predictable. i mentioned blood pressure early on. blood pressure is -- causes

holes in their arteries. if you have high qualityhdl -- the ideal blood pressure is 115 of 75. blood pressure is the number one cause the aging. nicotine pratt -- damages the arteries and so on and so forth. that is why this slide is so important. this is an image of are expected health care spending at the national level. i guarantee you -- i went to

wharton business school and i studied health care finance. i guarantee you that there is no way or help budget will increase at that rate. that process of dealing with cardiovascular crisis dramatically drives the health care budget. this is a national security issue if we do not deal with this. but conventional diets depends on -- there are a dozen redundant systems and the body. how many people can hold their breath indefinitely under water? none of you, not a line. it is impossible. it violates the basic understanding. likewise, you cannot lose weight by trying to lose weight. in biology will always beat your

willpower. we do not measure the right stuff. it does not matter what your weight is, it matters like waist is. i am 6 foot 1 inches tall, 6 times 1272 divided in half. if my waist size is more than 36.5 inches, i am at risk for cardiovascular disease. men never by a new adult size. the waltz around like this. it said the feeling greater. why is it more important? because of this. the gallbladder is the green

thing. you just had breakfast. it will mix with the bile there and watch as the food. it breaks down the smaller particles. it goes up to the big vein, which carries nutrients to the liver. if it is junk, as delivered gets fatty -- as your liver gets fatty, it releases toxic cholesterol. it is not the fact beneath the skin. that is not the causes disease. what kills us is that belly fact and that is beneath them also. that is uniquely placed there

because our ancestors in it to store fat in times of famine. stress is the number-one reason why we accumulate fat there. chronic stress was a famine. we did not have enough food -- how many of you smoke pot? the reason they get the munchies is because it turns on the same sensors in their rain -- brain. we have designed foods very specifically to tap into that. when you add sugar, it is like crack cocaine for the brain. they're all kinds of things that we can add to our food supply.

salt makes everything taste a little bit better. these are properties that force us to do just that. stress is not just from the outside. foods are a particular cause. most of you may not remember this, but your belly to lose weight -- you have the valve in your intestines that allows you to hold onto food long career. having the fiber for breakfast works. i am here, you do not have to keep eating. interestingly, some foods do not turn it on.

it is one of the reasons we believe that when you drink a soft drink at a meal, you'll not only have the drink, but you will eat independent of that an extra 125 calories. the entire obesity epidemic is about 100 calories a day. it is 12 pounds in the year. backup multiplied that by two years. these are simple insights that you begin to remember, the biology of blubber is not supporting the use of these simple carbohydrates. we make this mistake all the time. yogurt. big mistake. if you take the fact at of yogurt, what is left? sugar. it is a sugar drake. instead, you want the facts in

the milk. it was made that way for a reason. it seems to be independent of everything else. they have done trials on this. milk seems to be better off if you want to lose weight. every single trial ever done on diet soda show and they did not help you lose weight. it takes 30 minutes for it to come back to normal. 30 minutes, you can do a lot of damage.

you should never sit down when you are hungry. you should always have nuts. those 100 calories will dramatically -- you will not be craving a food that is in front of you anymore. these are simple ways for us to nudge the biology of blubber in the right direction. sedentary lifestyle? if you sit -- your mortality rates increase is 11%. it is important because it avoids frailty. if i got rid of all the cancer in america, we would live an average of 2.8 years longer. that is it. a little more than two years longer. what kills people is not the cancer, it is they are too frail to weather the treatment

or recover afterwards. same for heart disease. we go around the world where people live a long time. what do you do about it? you have to push yourself. look in the wild. when you do not push yourself, you end up with bony problems. osteoporosis. you have medications for it, but they are expensive. they do not work as well as resistance training. getting people to recognize it means reminding them what they used to do. here is a cheetah chasing its prey. watch what happens. ask yourself -- when was the last time you went at full speed?

when was the last time you gave it everything you had? our bodies were designed to do that. our average fitness at age 17 is the same as age 65. although we peak in our physical ability at age 27, our ability to endure activities at the age of 17 is the same at 65. we have the ability to sweat and breath in a way -- we have that ability. but we have forgotten that. we have to chip away at the extra crust that holds us back. we have about 200 people who work on the program.

we pull together -- i will go through some best practices. texas has the big texas initiative. these big competitions that are organized. one school will fight the game for another company or school. online training opportunities are huge. we started the show, we started a web business. that website gets about 100 million page views a month now. part of the reason is there is a voracious appetite for unadulterated health information. give the information they trust. the department of defense approached us and we are building the fitness portion of the army's website.

this is what all of our veterans will be using that allows them and their families and employees of the military to benefit from a slew of different tools. no advertising on the site. these are buildable endeavors. the infrastructure exists. if you do nothing else, take the real age test. it will tell you how old your body thinks you are. nobody cares about your chronological age. the real age test, based on 30,000 articles, is a test that we have that helps to define that. every single individual needs a barometer of how they're doing. we have ways of getting people recommendations. social media tools to give you a vice. when you get sick, you ask your friends how to manage it.

if the military is building them for our soldiers, we can use some for our state employees. california has a let's get healthy task force designing a long-term plan. they build their dashboard of health. i think you should think about this. how we assess, how we gauge how healthy we are are the numbers we will play against. let's figure out how we will grade it and then keep score. that dashboard, it is a clever way and how to agree on a common set of ideas. we create a little biopsy of the community. we can give us a report card back to the mayor or the governor of the states. because those governors care about the people in their states and appreciate the bigger scale of the issue when you are not healthy, they can use that as ammo to push through changes. in california, it was a big issue because disparities were costing them a lot of money. in new york, it is more about

the city of new york than the state of new york. the smoking bans did not hurt businesses. when everybody knew the rules, all the restaurants shifted over. this allows a more sophisticated way of dealing with the socialized costs so will we can share them more easily. if you create rules that everyone can follow, they will all do the right thing. otherwise, people will cherry pick and profit accordingly. i personally think each state will have to find their own way of going on this path. it is worth putting this in a

document. ask mike bloomberg if this is good or bad. if we're talking about the impact of sodas, that was worth the risk politically to get that conversation going. there are many other states. fantastic improvement in some of the major urban areas like philadelphia. when you look at this places, they are simple things done well. real food, social infrastructure, michigan has its 4x4 tool. it ought to be about second opinions. it is not about the doctors not being good. only 10% of americans get

second opinions for medical care. we have seen that roughly a third of the time, a second opinion will change the diagnosis or your therapy. think about that. the difference between re- operative back surgery in boston and houston is tenfold. how can the exact operation occur 10 times more often than another? it cannot be a tenfold difference. second opinions -- why don't people get second opinions? a minor procedure is a procedure for somebody else. if it is a procedure on you, it is not minor. that is the mindset. one of the things a lot of states is -- it is in 14 states and the district of columbia. it is basically the peace corps. the peace corps was created and

the basic concept was take energetic college kids give them a month or two of training and take them off to botswana and build dams. we take those same college kids and we put them through a month course about how to teach about health. we put them in school systems around the country. they teach the kids about what to eat and a share with the kids how to get better exercise. what they really do is to give the kids mental resilience. that is what health is all about. if people can control what is happening in their bodies, they can change the world outside their bodies. if they cannot even take care of their own habits, how can they

make a difference in their health? when kids your that message, it resonates with them. kids sharing insight with them about the world. all of a sudden, the big conversation happened and they will change what they do in their lives. it is a very inexpensive program. it cost about a dollar per kid. it is privately funded with a lot of public partnerships. it allows us to thrive and play a role and give you a model, an army of young people who will go on to their parents and fight with them anyway, but they open the refrigerator and they say mom, what gives? simple things that allow the conversation to take place. instead of kids being the achilles' heel, they become the backbone. we take organs into the schools. we work with in the teachers'

unions in order to get these volunteers to play an active role. they take these kids through life changing wakening of how critical, how vital the temple of the soul is. how do i drive this point home? let me leave you with a couple of action steps. this is a playful path to health. i am in 30 rockefeller center. we have a lot of input on comedy issues. change your state song to a workout routine. start a potato chip buyback program similar to a gun swap. pass a constitutional amendment on marriage requiring a certain number of sit-ups.

there are some simple tips that i think makes sense. we will win the battle for health in our kitchens and living rooms and bedrooms. i think you should have your own health dash board. business wants to play a role. when i first brought health corps to the leadership of new york, the first question -- my question was about the logistics. they said, we do not know how to get the private sector involved. one of the biggest business leaders -- how do they get involved? it is really hard. i want to use your dmv. the new jersey state dmv to message organ donation.

we are creating psas to go out in a celebratory way and get the folks realize that organs cannot go to heaven with you and get people to donate. it is a simple concept. the thought dawned on me, the unique ability to message to people. you have all the information. people open their dmv mail. you can give them tips that are valuable to them. those messages might be valuable. we can extrapolate from -- i welcome the states that desire that as well. junk food free zones ought to be part of that. you each ought to have a governor's olympics. simple things like that that allow teachers to have an excuse to talk to the kids about health.

this could happen from business to business as well. when these folks celebrate, a 10th grade teacher will get their kids to measure how much they walk. when you go home today, what should you do? you should think about 15 minute physicals. your local hospital will find these. it has screened thousands of people for almost nothing and you allow a conversation to take place. it is not scary. almost everybody has a job, but a lot do not have insurance. give them the way of crawling back out of the abyss and give them an opportunity.

they do not have the right to health, but they have the right to access. health corps is out there. the first lady -- you know about these. it is inexpensive, it is customized, and it should be your program in your state. i do not think you ought to hire smokers. it is indefensible for us to spend 15% more money at the same time letting people hurt themselves. we have to be smarter than this. we have a solution that will be complex that will work. find out ways of making its legal for employers not to have to hire a smoker.

i want to hire you, but i cannot do it. i think that message will resonate. as opposed to the finger wagging. finally, keep nuts in your pockets. thank you very much. [applause] >> questions? >> i know we could do this for a very long time. we have to keep moving. >> i will start calling on

people. one of the women asked about the single most important thing to do for longevity. it is more sexual activity. and then they started asking very pointed questions. we started delving into the reality of 80% of the time when there is erectile dysfunction, it is mental. the average american is intimate once a week. if we could go from once a week to twice a week, you would increase your life expectancy three years and would be a lot more fun. that is your goal when you go home. go from once to twice a week. it should be very sustainable for them to get this job done. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] >> ben bernanke will be on capitol hill tomorrow morning to deliver the monetary policy report. live coverage of his testimony before the senate banking

committee will be on c-span3.

. . ..

hugs they are binding. -- >> they are binding. >> i am talking about the statement of the u.s. officials on the amputees.

the best way to move forward is the major principles to be agreed to a sure iran and the states will respect the rights and to ensure -- the priority for the u.s. and the west is 20% enrichment. if this is true, if they want iran to tap its arrangement -- enrichment at five percent and then they went the wrong to limit it stockpiles, iran has

said, we are ready to stop 20% enrichment. they would be ready to for any deal on the stockpiles. the issue is with reciprocation's. this is the big issue of no greater capability. capping at five percent. they are not ready to talk to the united nations security council resolutions at all. they are not ready to talk here are really -- unilaterally about u.s. sanctions. there is only one option for the europeans to take the unilateral sanctions if iran is going to accept a that i percent and

limitations on it stop files. otherwise, if they are going to ask to major substantial issues from élan and promise are wrong iran and will -- from promise -- they had to make the first move to restore confidence. it is a room that is an violations. if iran makes steps that shows goodwill, stopping 20% of lenient enrichment, which does not need that much, some of these other sanctions that have been passed against iran can be reconsidered.

even the european sanctions. you have reciprocity. it is a matter of a ron that first step. that is what the international community is waiting for, not just progress on iran's nuclear programs where it installed more advanced centrifuges. it does something that can leave -- relieve the pressure on the u.s. administration because the u.s. government faces a lot of political pressure in handling negotiations. if the p5 plus one comes out and eases sanctions, there is no property -- no reciprocity in to crowtehran. x if iran will stop percent, when you say you ran should show the goodwill, the program is not what you ran -- iran.

with the p5 plus one. everyone is crying today, scared about 20%. this is a big issue. everyone forgets iran made the first goodwill inch edward 2000 thousand 10 when the arabian foreign minister -- iranian public minister said we are enriching below five percent. if the p5 plus one gives fuel routes for to around, it would not increase oil enrichment to 20%. this calculation -- they believe iran does not capability -- does not have capability to make pretty percent. they believe iran is bluffing. they consider it as a bluff. in september 2011, remember

they said we maybe the 20%. we have it. give us the fuel routes. we will stop it. it was the iranian initiative not to go beyond five percent. it was the iranian initiative to stop 20%. this was the goodwill. miscalculation in the p5 plus one. they believed iran is laughing and they do not have the capability to -- is bluffing. when i was negotiating, i was a member of the negotiation team. we suspended the enrichment

involuntarily. after all this goodwill, they came and they said, no, you should suspend your enrichment for an indefinite amount of time. maybe 10 years. is this goodwill? you are wrong. the problem is with the p5 plus one. >> we are the p three panel of us want. i want to ask our panelists to be brief. we have other questions that we want to address. let's keep looking forward. there is a long history that we could unravel if we had time. i have a question. this is the second row. identify yourself.

ask your question briefly. >> you mentioned using the metaphor of course for rapid. -- horse for rabbit. i do not want this opportunity to pass to see if you -- would you find his articulation of iran's point of view of giving force for wars the cosi is -- he is giving course for course and he is pointing out problems with the language and negotiating. how would you address these problems that he is raising?

>> p and i are getting closer together. the course is getting smaller. the rabbit is growing. one can pick holes and some of the expressions. one can take a look at this. i do not doubt that there are elements of goodwill for around. -- iran. it has decided to make proposals. it secretary of state has made clear that the no enrichment forever proposal for 10 years is no longer a central part of where the u.s. is going. it is conditioned. the us has tried to expand sanctions relief. it is talking about gold. it should be talking about no new sanctions if we can get a process going. that is inevitable. that is important. there is a lot to junior.

-- there is a lot to do here. it would be helpful to have a talk with leading iranian experts on what their plan is for the nuclear program. i worked hard to try to figure out some uses that iran could put on the table. to justify a portion of what it has. that is not where that continuity -- ingenuity should come from. the hopeful to know that they are ready to stop 20%. can they use some of the 20% for their own fuel? i have no objection to that. that goes ahead under supervision and takes it to a less easily reversible form for frick out. hussein is right. a big preoccupation now is on

the wrong positioning itself or it could engage in a rapid breakout. that is a central piece of what we have been talking about an an effort to describe the end state in terms both sides could agree on. if iran wants us to recognize its right to arrest -- enrich that, that is important only on the basis that we would at some point change the security council resolution which seeks to mandate no a richmond -- no enrichment in iran. that could be accompanied by words. if iran find it the focal entrusting our words about regime change, why is it easy to trust our words about the right to enrich? we have to figure out the actions to take.

this is a difficult problem. getting started is hard. there are elements of having getting started and they were rebuffed or ignored. we need to get out of that mode. we need to fight our way forward. it is anybody who has good intentions to see that this process get started. i have suggested ways the us could do that. there are ways that iran can do that. if we do something to get the process started, hopefully that could be reciprocated. it is good news that we are meeting. i remember when we met once a year, came for a meeting, dismissed the other side point of view. that is not productive. >> other questions. >> the fall of assad and syria

would be a blow to iran and has below -- hezbollah. what do you think about how syria plays in the background of these negotiations? is assad's problem a help to the p5 plus one or a hindrance encourages iranians to dig and more? >> i believe the syria issue is not about syria. it is about iran. having experienced eight years of war, i cannot imagine the islamic republic of iran challenging such a situation.

all the regional countries -- she was nine, soviet union. they boycotted iran on everything. the whole eight years i was in iran. it started the war went iran could not produce -- when iraq invaded iran. iran was 100% independent. for iran doesion not worsen that time. the country after the revolution did not have an established system.

iraq invaded iran. europe, u.s. was supporting the use of the chemical weapons. 100,000 iranians were killed or injured. one million were killed. after the war, iran possessed conventional arms. tanks, and where is saddam? the sanctions today are less than what iran experienced. syria is a small issues compared to 1980 through 1988. the west has problems trying to understand the potential of iranians.

they are different than some regional arab countries. very clever. the notion of sanctions is really important to understand. in 2005, when the us decided to launch the sanctions, iran had about 1000 centrifuges this. iran has over 10,000 centrifuges. around was enriching below five percent. now, it is 20%. iran was working the ir1.

they could not produce. produce.etey .his is iranian psychology they want to say they will not give in on the sanctions. sanctions have harmed iranian nation. if the target for the sanction is and was and is about the nuclear issue, more sanctions, you should prepare yourself for more enrichment, capability, capacity. this is a race they can continue. >> let's take a couple questions and sequence.

one thing that has not been touched as the things happening behind the scenes, the covert war against iranian scientists that may or may not be happening with help from the u.s. intelligence and the u.s. fiberboard that is happening and has success. do you think that iran can't believe the u.s. is not looking for regime change or a speaking in good faith if they can you this -- use this warfare? should those thing be halted to diplomacy a shot? >> identify yourself. >> thank you for taking my question.

how do you assess the descent do you think [indiscernible] there is a difference between a us approach between the iranian program and the other program? >> these that protects best the cyber attacks are designed to iran.down the ranks -- rian's some of the policies are mentant allierss.e outr

es are arguie fif the polici uctive. in terms of inducing tehran to make concessions, probably not. this does not seem productive. they were meant to slow down the iranian program. the cyber attacks seem to do so for a while. we have seen iran's program advance. i am not sure how those attacks are productive in terms of ehran to o her on-- the nefgotiate. >> secretary clinton condemned the associations.

as the process of the developing of iranian program went ahead, slowing it down has been an objective for a long amount of time whether it involves the interaction of external supply or stuxnet. on the dprk, for different reasons, different approaches to the use of military force have been taken. in neither case as it resulted in the use of military force. the u.s. regrets that the north koreans have advanced their programs to the test stage. it is a mistake. i am not sure what we can do next. the chinese same to be concerned

because the north koreans are being dependent upon china to provide a buffer of stability on the border. they are creating a zone of instability on china's border. we would hope china would play a more forceful role since they seem to have a great deal of influence. one would hope as well that the example of a failure to support united action in north korea would be also a lesson china would pick up with respect to dealing with iran. we should seek at the negotiating table -- we should sit at the negotiation table as long as possible. if we can do that only with a more united support around the

negotiating table. >> on north korea, i have already frequently said iranians [indiscernible]north korea with cruel -- withdrew and tested a nuclear bomb. iran does not have a nuclear bomb. the level of sanctions on iran is more than one korea. this is a double standard of the u.s. and the west of having a should teach it relationship with other countries. the issues are not nuclear. the problem is here. s -- this is l n s

ike sanctions. when they started this in 2010, within three years, iran has established one of the most powerful cyber armies in the world. this is the gift of the u.s. and israelis to iranian nations. they have the top five most powerful on the cyber issue. this is the reaction of irradiance. stophey believe they can -- k gt, the reaction is -- as lon thieir continure e mistakes. >> we are out of time.

i have one concluding question for the panelists. we have heard -- it has been a rich discussion. we get a sense of how challenging the discussions are going to be because there is such a long history. there are so many grievances on both sides. there are areas of agreement. it is important for the u.s. to bring those out. you heard key areas of agreement amongst our panelists despite some of the different perspectives. that does not mean a solution is possible. it is somewhere out there. i wanted to ask you to try to answer briefly whether you believe in 2013 there may be progress toward resolving the

long-standing nuclear disputes? if so, why do you think there is a chance for progress? >> yes, there may be some progress. i would not bet money on it. we can see the same thing in 2014 and 2015. we could see the situation drag on. there may be some progress because tehran feels pressure to sanctions economically. the nuclear program has advanced. tremendous damage and the regime and leadership in tehran has faced pressure to be flexible ont h the nuclear program.

that is the cause for hope. when it comes time to negotiate, the p5 plus one should be more flexible. some of the man's, closing -- some of the demands may not be as flexible as perceived by tehran. there is room for p5 plus one to m maneuver. >> thank you. >> there would be a breakthrough if the u.s. change it to its original strategy toward iranian nuclear issues and iranian global issues if -- i disagree that there will be no

solutions. in the decade, we will have neither regime change in washington or around. -- iran. we should try to find a realistic solution. it depends on the-u.s. relations. -- iran-u.s. relation. we need to work on iran us relations. best way to create trust between the iran and the u.s. is to start from the issues of common interest. iran and u.s. have been concentrated on disputes. ther e are a lot of failed

issues like afghanistan, iragq, drug trafficking, which they have, and stances. if the u.s. withdraws from afghanistan and iraq, iran can resist. washington and tehran supported the same government in baghdad and kabul. why they cannot sit together to cooperate to create confidence. confidence through common interests would work more than confidence through the issues of disputes. >> thank you. >> we hope there will be a

process that will lead somewhere. i would be willing to put money on a positive outcome. lot.lo everal issues stand in the way. iran will have to think carefully. it is trying to put on the table what it is iran wants. it is not incompatible with u.s. objectives. the nuclear program under transparency under sanctions and a process that can go ahead with international support, monitoring, and supervision. to some extent, what you consider to be the misbehavior of the united states has been matched with the elements the mistrust the us has against

iran. it will not be possible to argue that the pressure tactics should prevent iran from achieving what it says it wants, which is coming close to being put on the table. it is within reach and serious negotiation. it has to have more than one day meetings, which seems to be arre kind of dual core -- r angement no one is willing to break. if you are going to have a kind of preliminary precondition from the supreme leader that somehow we have to find a way to wash our souls and public so they are whiter than snow, i do not know how we will do it. it is not in my view within the range of possibilities.

a precondition will stand in the way of achieving what you say are your object is. it is important. we have presented preconditions for conversation despite the fact there is preoccupation with pmd and other issues that hang on out there. we need to find a way through that hurdle. you made a better statement about the value and importance of bilateral negotiations than i did. i am in agreement with you. we need to think about how to find a way over the hurdles that seem to have been popping up with respect to that particular question. i suspect that there are political concerns. we have to understand. we have to do our best to make people believe and understand that leadership is leadership.

when it comes to overcoming domestic lyrical concerns, if the risk is worth taking, we cannot rule by the polls. we have to encourage leaders on those few things that make serious difference to reach out and stake a position, even if prisons -- even if it prisons dangers. we have for years until the next election. you have an indeterminate time for supreme leadership to stay in power. all of this gives us an opportunity in 2013 to pick up that opportunity. i hope we can find ways to overcome what are the drags on the process. i am not saying they are all on one side. the opportunity do discuss those in public and talk about ways in which we are agreement.

i wrote an article three years ago saying we should find a way to try to begin to attack some of those questions in power will -- in parallel or a different format as a way to increase the possibility of building confidence. 2013 is a good year at to think -- a good year to think about that. thank you for the opportunity for everything you do. >> thank you. [applause]thank you all for a rational and interesting conversation. this will not be the last. there is more on the arms control association website and on our book on the history of efforts on the subject. the option for diplomats.

we look forward to seeing you. we are adjourned. thank you for coming. [captioning performed bynational captioning institute] [captions copyright nationalcable satellite corp. 2013]

rex a discussion on privacy in the digital age. on washington journal, we focus on sequestration. that is live at numeral 7:00 eastern. federal reserve chairman ben bernanke will be on capitol hill to deliver the semiannual monetary policy report. live coverage will be live on c- span three at 10ere:00.

a forum on privacy in the digital age. the brennan center for chuck hosts this.sustice >> we are pleased to do this event at nyu's campus in d.c. we are here to discuss one of the most important issues, when and how the government can access the records of our daily life sick -- e-mails, cell phone data, things of that nature. people concerned with privacy have complained for a while that the law has not kept pace with technology and the government can obtain, store, and accessed increasing amounts of data about our daily lives. have you see is an issue that is

difficult to get people to care about. an article compared the privacy damage compared to environmental harm in the sense that it happens little by little. it may add up to a loss of privacy that is unacceptable in our democracy. are we there yet? it seems like we have reached an expression -- an inflection point. more people are concerned about the issue. we could see it covered in the issue more. a computing factor was the petraeus affair. it seems like in the case, the fbi did have boring. the investigation made people realize that e-mails were not private. how does he advocates took advantage of that moment to put forth the concerns they had talked about for years.

two other things that happened over the last year that has put rbc at the center agenda. the decision of the u.s. supreme court where the court found hacking a gps device to a car for tracking movement for months was not like following someone on the public highways. we have seen articles in the press about the eyes in the skies, surveillance drones over cities that soon from 20,000 feet to an object on the ground. these issues are part of the public debate these days. we have an accomplished panel to discuss these issues. i will introduce him in the order in which they will speak. we have judged denny blog of the six circuit court of appeals. he is the author of the

decision of the warsaw case. ken weinstein served as the first assistant attorney general for national security and homeland security adviser to president bush. the head of the aclu's washington office laura murphy. david leaver, privacy party inuncil for google ban washington. we should have an half an hour for questions and answers from the audience. i will start. we will start witht the judge.

tell us about the war shack case and your decision on the e- mails the government obtained without a warrant. >> i do not process the expertise that some of my colleagues do. this was one of 200 fully argued cases we had. we decided the issue was before us. that was it. i will tell you about the case. i will not go further than what was in the case. i will not opine on any other things that may come before me. ran a business and purpose vehicles -- pharmaceuticals for male enhancement. it had a variety of financial activities with banks and customers that led to 112 counts of bank fraud, mail

fraud, money laundering, and other things. we had a 110 page opinion, of which one doesn't pages have to haveth -- 100one dozen pages to do with this issue. the government obtained his e- mails have and do with activities within the country. under the statute of tropical cost, it was not necessary. the first attack on this was it violated the fourth amendment under doctrine that did he have a reasonable expectation of privacy in vain the contents of the e-mails. contents was a good bit of the analysis. the three judges agreed.

it went through past analogy use. the contents of letters are secure in the sense you have a reasonable expectation of drivers see. the content -- telephone calls -- have a reasonable expectation of privacy. the government may get a record of how long it lasted. a career who carries a message -- a courier who carries a message, but government may not be able to get the content. the contents of e-mails were protected. the actual language in the opinion was given the fundamental similarities between ml and traditional

forms of communication, it would defy common sense to afford e-mails lesser fourth amendment protection. e-mail requires strong protection under the fourth amendment. otherwise, the fourth amendment would be an ineffective guardian of private communication. in our discussion of this case, we said, we relied on the analogy to a letter or two a phone call. that is controversial. gh the isp can access the e-mails, we analogized hotel guests have a reasonable expectation of privacy in their rooms even though the maids enter the rooms to replace y.wels and tai chdid differenceay ebbe a

between the government's right and you're right against mates. dieds. the maid can report what is .ound to the poilicelice the issues on the table going forward have to do a lot with traditional doctrine as it would apply to the recipient of e-mails. the recipient of letters can do whatever the recipient wishes. that was not before us. we left many other questions that we did not have to opine on in that case. we did not go any further. is will come out later on.

those who are looking for doctrine, the supreme court has before it a case that seems different, which is about a document on your porch. that may say something about what the supreme court thinks about what we would say as formalist a dr. and rather than rather a formalrine view. a policeman can go on your porch without violating your privacy. if marijuana spells are coming out of your house, a dog can smell that. you do not have a reasonable expectation of what is coming outside the house. the other side says it is not what people usually think. the dog is an enhanced device. we should take a broader and less formal view.

i am not getting any view on how that will come out. you may want to watch that for how the supreme court is thinking about the fourth amendment in novel context. >> tell us a little about where the government is coming from with this issue. >> i am going to take the government position on this, even though i am not in government. i spent time in the national security arena looking at this. i would pivot off of the analogy you had about civil liberties and environmental erosion. you have to be concerned that as we are focusing on threats and crying and the prevention of crimes and national security threats that we do not compromise our civil liberties.

there is a difference between environmental relations and our protections of privacy. and environmental erosion, it is hard to perceive on how there may be of benefit. it may not be offset by another benefit. in privacy protections, the protections come at the expense of effectiveness of law enforcement and national security operations. but we have seen since 9/11, this is an ongoing process. the revision of those authorities as new technologies, online, we have seen that over the decades. that process has been pronounced since 9/11. 9/11 woke us up to the need to take a look at the tools we use

to make sure they are up with the times. there were strengthening of the tools. we saw that with the amendments that came out in 2008 where we try to get electronic surveillance statutes for national security operations up to the times with e-mail and smart communication -- art of communication. that is the issue we face today. we have a 1980's statue. te. does that work? gress take a meat cleaver or scalpel to it? how do we protect the stored e- mail communications, which is

the critical piece of the statute. that is the question of whether the statute allows the government to get stored e- mails that are over 180 days old and get them with something short of a search warrant. they can get a court order showing the information is relevant or use a subpoena without a court;'s involvement. that does not work under the fourth amendment. we could have the legal debates. see itge and i differently. we need to think about the implications of what a new standard that you have to use. probable cost to get a warrant. the implications would be serious. if you are going to get a court

order any way to get those communications, you have to show those communications are relevant to an ongoing investigation. what is the difference between that and showing possible cause that there is criminal activity? there is is a difference. there are situations where the government needs to look at those e-mails and will not have probable cause but it will be critical to build the case or predication that allows more serious steps later on to which you would need to get probable cause for a search warrant. there are agencies that do not have search warrant authority, like the sec and ftc. they would not be able to go and get e-mails. you have implications that we

need to think through before making drastic changes to legislation. there has been debate. senator leahy has been keying this up for debate. the government has been testifying making its case. it has not been resistant to change recognizing that this is an old statute and technology has changed and we need to change with times. be careful and make sure we make changes in a calibrated way. the ability to get stored e- mails is a vital school. we have to make sure that you do not make the process overly difficult by requiring everything to stop, get probable cause, and go to a judge first.

>> talk about the third-party doctrine. it is the idea that -- is e- mail the same as regular mail? access our e-mails. this is used for advertising purposes to target advertising to particular users. does the fact that that is happening somehow make e-mail different from regular mail? what is the difference between a private apartment -- private axis in our e-mail and the accessing e-mail? >> go back to something that can set about the comparison to environmental degradation and there is no comparison when it comes to being able to observe the damage. there is a great deal of damage going on because of the third- party doctrine.

people still operate in this country with the belief that their communications are private. whether they get through the internet or whether they go through the mail, people believe that. the fourth amendment says, the right of the people to be secure or their persons, houses, papers, and effect against unreasonable searches and seizures should not be violated but upon probable cause supported by oath or affirmation and describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized. what is happening now is that the government can surreptitiously look at your e- mail without a warrant, without believing you are engaged in criminal activity, and suck up that information.

we do not know how it is sortore d, whether it will be destroyed, with whom it is shared. this is personal. your intellectual property, health records, deepest, darkest secrets. even if you ask the american people to come to city hall on the day and say, the government wants to have a printout out of all the websites you visited, and please print out for the last six months what the websites are, they would be deeply offended. whether or not it is legitimate an the eyes of law enforcement, is not the question. it is whether or not people have a reasonable expectation of privacy in their communications. it is time to revisit the third-

party doctrine. that developed before the world wide web is what it is and before cloud computing. there was a time when we got our e-mails, downloaded them from servers, and they ceased to be on servers. now it is stored indefinitely. when the government was to take a vacuum cleaner and suck up your e-mail history beyond 180 days, that is a very invasive search. it goes against the spirit of the fourth amendment. it cries out for review by congress in late updating the electronic communications privacy act. judge boggs hit it right in his decision.

when you look at the facts in that case and how many documents documents-- how mabny were seized, it was an amazing amount of personal and business information. one of the concerns i have about law enforcement is not that they are unable to get the information they need in a timely fashion. how often do you hear about judges refusing to sign search warrants? it does not happen that often especially in national security. what concerns me is the effectiveness of law enforcement when they screwed up so much information about individuals and they increase the haystack. if you are trying to find the needle was the terrorist, you are having government people

combing through volumes of your information. how is that a focused search? how is that the best use of taxpayer resources? we are seeing that governments are gathering information about chat rooms involving arab muslims and south asians. these are part -- the department of homeland security are targeting people. where is the information going? it is very different than if a private entity wants to use that information. the government has the power to punish you. the government has the power to make determinations about your loyalty. the government has the power to the government has the power to leak