he is also a seven time winner of the award. net has a long and distinguished career and this is in your program. of the chair e.o. under president clinton. i'm going turn it over to alan. our time is short to make a few remark then we'll hear from janet. thank you very much. >> thank you, randy. when you said two distinguished, i looked around because i figured someone else had to be up here. there is one aspect of janet's bio that is not in there and i'm furious. it turns out she and i are both from brooklyn, new york.

[applause] it turns out -- yes. it turns out we both had speech therapy for accents. [laughter] it turns out these therapists are 0-2. nce she and i are here it is brooklyn's revenge on the world. i'm hoping you will be nice to her because when she gets up here, she's our guest. quayry e yells or carries on, i will cut you off at the knees. i will not be polite. this is proof that you can take the woman out of brooklyn but -- brooklynn out of out of the woman. >> thank you. i lived in california and it has

not made a difference. thank you for inviting me here and i think it is a perfect opportunity to speak on to topic to promote a stronger economy. the vital rule in growing use of communication in monetary policy. some of you covered the federal reserve and are familiar with how it sits monetary policy to the federal open market committee. you know that the influence c.p. pays close attention in what it says in the statements it issues after each meeting. this is supplemented by chairman bernanke's press conferences and providing detailed minutes of the meetings. getting this message out to the public depends on the work that you do in reporting and analyzing the statements and actions and explaining its roles

and objectives. want to thank you for those contributions. let me also say while i'm particularly pleased to speak to you fape all of you are consumers and producers of communication. at first glance, the o.f.m.'s communication may not seem different from what you've heard other government agencies about what they say about their policies or what businesses say about their products. i hope to show how communication plays a distinct and special role in monetary policy. i would like to offer a comparison that may highlight that difference. suppose instead of monetary policy we were talking about an example of transportation policy. widening roads to ease traffic

congestion. whether this road project is announced to the televiced press conference or in a low-key press release, or if there is no announcement. the project is more or less the same. the benefit to drivers will come after the road is widened and it won't be affected whether drivers knew about the project years in advance. at the heart of everything, i will be explaining today that the fact that mon tear policy is different. -- monetary policy is different. it depends on the critically on the public getting the message about what policy will do months or years in the future. to develop this idea, i will take you on a tour of past o.f.m.c. communication, the present, and what i perceive to the future. until recently, most banks avoid

communicating about monetary policy. the governor of the bank in england in the early 20th century repeatedly lived by the motto never explain, never excuse. that approach was still firmly in place at the federal reserve when i went to work there as a teffle economists in 1977. i will explain how the importance of transparency shaped communication in the years before the financial crisis. next i will relate how the financial crisis brought unprecedented challenges for monetary policy that required the use holve unconventional policy tools, including the ones that were barely contemplated before the crisis.

communication was the center piece of these efforts. finally, i will look ahead. i'm encouraged by signs that the economy is improving and healing from the trauma of the crisis. expected at some point the ofmc will return to a normal approach to monetary policy. i will discuss the communications challenges that the -- they will face when it comes time to make the transition. fomc has long been a topic of great interest to me. it is one that i've worked on more directly since 2010 when chairman bernanke asked me to lead a sub committee on communications. repeatly, i used the word revolution to describe the change from never explain to the

current embrace of transparency in the fomc's communication. that may sound surprising to an audience what it feels like to be in the middle of a communication revolution. the speed and frequency of most communication, it seems never stops growing. i will admit, the fomc's changes to the pace and form of communication seem pretty modest in comparison. i mentioned the quarterly press conferences, which were initiated two years ago. these events are televised and streamed live, the mode for most of the fomc's communication is decidely old school. it is the printed word. the committee's most watched piece of communication is the written statement issued after each of its meetings, which are

held roughly every six weeks. it may seem quaint that my colleagues and i continue to spend many hours laboring over the few hundred words in the statement, which are then analyzed minutes after the release. the revolution in the fomc's communication though isn't about technology or speed. it is a revolution in our understanding on how communication can influence the effectiveness of policy. think it will help if i start with basics. the fomc consists of the seven members of the federal reserve bored in washington and five of the 12 presidents of the federal reserve banks. all 12 presidents participate in the fomc but only five get a vote. the fomc's job, which is

assigned by congress, is to use monetary policy to promote maximum employment and stable prices. these objectives together are known as the federal reserve's dual mandate. in normal times the committee pursues the goal business influencing the level of a short-term interest rate. that's what banks charge each other for overnight loans. when the fomc pushing the funds rate up or down other short-term interest rates move in tandem. medium and longer term interest rates, including auto loan rates and mortgage ratings adjust also to a mechanism i will return to in a minute. by pushing the federal fundings rate up or down, the fomc seeks

to influence a wide range of interest rates that matter to households and businesses. typically, the fomc works to lower the federal funds rate with the intention of reducing the rates when the economy is weakening. the fom exrrvings raises the rate when inflation threatens to rise above its objective or when economic activity is likely to rise above sustainable levels. raising and lowering that federal funds rate was long the primary means that the fomc pursued its economic objectives. but hard to imagine now the federal reserve and other banks provided the public will w little information about so much

monetary policy moves. the spirit of never explain was very much alive. there were different justification of that approach. one view was less disclosure ould reduce the risk and lower suspiciouses -- suspicions. some believe that markets would overreact to details about monetary policy decisions. there was a widespread belief that communicating about how the fomc might act in the future could limit the committee's iscresh to change policy in -- discretionary to change the policy. the transparency was limited benefit for monetary policy. in some cases it could cause

problems and make the policy legislation effective. while the communication increased elsewhere in society, change came slosely to the fomc. 1994, t until february that the committee issued a statement that there was a change in monetary policy. even then it only alerted that the public that the committee changed its policy even it offered an explanation. something big was changing though. it would soon be the force driving major enhancements in the fomc's communication. by the early 1990's, a growing body of research challenged widespread assumptions about how central banks, such as the federal reserve affected the economy. that reevaluation starts with a

question that puzzled many of my students when i was a professor. how is it that the federal reserve manages to move a vast economy just by raising or lowering the interest rate on .25%.ght loans by the question arises because significant spending decembers. the exexpanding of business, deciding on , or how much to spend on consumer goods over a year. those depend on employment and other conditions over a longer term as well as longer term interest rates. the crucial insight of that research was that what happens to the federal funds rate today or over the six weeks until the ext fomc meeting is relatively

unimportant. what is important is the public's expectations of how the fomc will use the funds rate to influence economic conditions over the next few years. for this reason, the federal reserve's ability to influence economic conditions today depends on its ability to shape expectations of the future. specifically, by helping the public understand how it intended to conduct policy overtime and what the likely implications of those actions will be for economic conditions. to return to the example i used earlier, contrast this effect on expectations with that of a road project. today's commute will not be improved or changed at all by the news that a road will be

widened one day. but the effects of today's monetary policy actions are largely due to the effects it has on expectations about how policy will be set over the medium term. let me further illustrate with this with some history. starting in the mid-1960's the federal reserve didn't act forcefully in the face of rigse inflation. the public grew less certain of the federal reserve's ability to fight inflation. this uncertainty led futures of inflation to become unanchored and more likely to react to economic developments. n 1973, an oil price shock led to a large increase in overall inflation. expectations of high erin flation in the future --

higher inflation affected areas. businesses acted in anticipation of higher costs. all that fueled actual inflation. the fomc's efforts to reduce were on in the 1970's ineffective partly due to expectations that it would not do enough. by contrast, you probably know about the federal reserve's successful inflation fighting in the early 1980's. the fomc raised the federal funds rate very high, causing a deep recession. but also convincing the public that it was committed to low and stable inflation. anchoring inflation expectations at low levels helped to ensure that the jumps in commodity prices or other supply shocks

would not generate persistent inflation problems. this was illustrated by the effect of another acceleration of oil prices that started in 2005. unlike the 1970's, these price shocks did not result in an increase in overall inflation. that is because the public believed that the federal reserve would keep inflation in check. the fomc wasn't forced to raise interest rates. that softened the blow on huer households and -- householders and businesses. it wasn't necessary because of the credibility that the federal reserve built in the 1980's. you might wonder how monetary policy had any effect prior to the revolution.

as it turns out, with a notable exception of the late 1960's and 1970's, the fomc usually responded in a systemic way to economy conditions. in 1993, the economist, john taylor, documented that the fomc licy changes since the mid 1980's reliably followed based on inflation and output. changes in the federal funds rate was usually made in small steps over a number of months. in practice, the federal reserve's approach was never explained but behaved predictably. a close analysis of the fomc's past behavior was a good guide to future policy.

it had two shortcomings as a substitute for transparent. it gave an advantage to sophisticated players who fomc's behavior, which is inappropriate for a government institution. cond, as the policy rule explained the federal funds rate much of the time, there were cases when it didn't. even when the experts failed to correctly anticipate the fomc's actions. the trend toward greater tans early y accelerated in 2000's. they issued statements after every meeting about the economic outlook and it provide an assessment to the balance and risks to the economy and whether it was leaning to increasing or

decreasing the federal fund's rate in the future. such information about intentions and expectations of the future, which is known as forward guidance became crucial in 2003 when the committee was faced with a weak recovery from the 2001 recession. it cut the federal funds to the very low level of 1% but unemployment remained elevated. the fomc sought some further way to stimulate the economy. in this situation, it told the public that it intended to keep the federal funds rate low for longer than might have been expected. by adding to its statement the words "in these circumstances the committee believes that policy accommodation can many b

aintained for aable period." let's pause and note what this moment represented. for the first time the committee as using communication, mere words as its primary monetary policy tool. until then it was probably common to think of communication about future policy as something that supplemented the federal funds rate. but in this case, communication was an independent and i believe effective tool for influencing the economy. he fomc had journeyed from never explain to a point where sometimes the explanation is the policy. by the eve of the recent financial crisis, it was established that the fomc could

not rely on its record of systemic behavior as a substitute for communication. special under unusual circumstances for which history had little to teach. i think we're all fortunate that policymakers learned this lesson because the fomc was about to encounter unprecedented economic conditions and policy challenges. the financial crisis and its aftermath demands advances in fomc's communication as great as what had come before. the situation in 2008 and 2009 was like nothing the federal reserve had faced since the 1930's. in late 2008, the fomc cut the federal funds rate nearly to zero. ascertainly as low as it could go and where it has remained.

with its traditional tool of luringry monetary policy the funds rate off the table, e fomc turned to newly invented policy options to try both to help stabilize the inancial system and to lower the risk in economic activity. the public grew accustomed to the federal funds rate. with occasional, at this point limited guidance to a particular policy stance would probably last for a while. beyond the task of describing the new policies, extensive new communication was needed to justify these unconventional policy actions. and to connect them to the

federal reserve inflation objectives. the best known of these unconventional policies is large-scale asset purchases, which is commonly known as quantitative easing. in late 2008 and continuing through today, the federal reserve has purchased longer term government debt securities, agency guarantee mortgage backed security and longer term treasury securities that totaled o $2.5 trillion to our assets. these purchases were intended o, i believe have succeeded in lowering interest rates and raising asset prices to help further the federal reserve's economic objectives. this is an easing of monetary policy also known as accommodation beyond what ask

provided by maintaining the federal funds rate close to zero. but it is important to emphasize that the effects of asset purchases also depend on expectations. if the fomc bought $10 billion in longer terms security today but is expected to sell them tomorrow or very shortly, there will be little effect on the economy. current research suggests that the effects of the asset purchases depend on expectations of total value of securities that the fomc intends to buy and the expectations that the fomc intends to hold those securities. to make these asset purchases effective as possible and adding accommodation, the fomc therefore needs to communicate the intended path of the federal

reserve security holdings years into the future. i'm going return in a moment to current and possible future ways in which the fomc does and might communicate such information. the other unconventional policy designed to contribute monetary easing was almost purely communication. it is enhanced forward guidance about how long the committee expects to maintain the federal funds rate near zero. the situation in early 2009 was similar to 2003 but, yet, more challenging. in that earlier episode the fomc at least retained some option of a further reduction in the federal funds rate target. in 2009, communication about the future path of the federal funds

rate was the only option. well, initially the forward guidance was simple and familiar. the fomc's statement noted that "economic conditions are likely to warrant exceptionally low levels of the federal funds rate for an extended period." the committee then enhanced its forward guidance in august of 2011 when it substituted at least through mid-2013 for the words "extended period." this date was moved into the future several times, most reerntly last september when it mid-2015.d to this calendar guidance was an advance over the indefinite extended period but it suffered from an important limitation.

the date failed to provide the public with a clear understanding of what conditions he fomc was trying to achieve. what are the economic conditions that would warrant the policy? the consequences was hard for the public to tell whether a change in the calendar date reflected a shift in policy or just a change in the committee's economic forecast. to help provide greater clarity about the committee's objectives, in january 2012, the fomc adopted and released a statement of its longer run goals and monetary policy strategy. the statement laid out for the first time the rates of inflation of unfloiment that the fomc considers -- unemployment hat the fomc considers

mandated. the goal most consistent with the mandate is 2%. the central tendency of fomc's participants estimates of the longer run of unemployment ranges from 5.2%-6%. this statement also made clear economic developments may cause inflation in unemployment to temporarily move away from those objectives and the committee will use a balanced approach to return both of them over time to the longer run goals. on the one hand, for example, the current rate of unemployment 5.2%-6%is far above the range in the statement. it is expected to decline gradually.

inflation, on the other hand, has been running at or below 2% and is expected to remain at similar levels for several years. in this circumstance, both legs of the dual mandate call for a highly accommodative monetary policy. with unemployment so far from with unemployment so far from its normal level, i believe progress for reducing unemployment should take precedence, even if reducing unemployment might result in inflation slightly temporarily exceeding 2%. the committee reaffirmed this statement in january 2013, and i expect it to remain a valuable road map for many years to come, indicating how monetary policy will respond to changes in economic conditions. meanwhile, the fomc has

continued to enhance its communication about how it would use the federal funds rate to return to inflation and unemployment to its longer run objectives. last december, the committee replaced its calendar guidance for the federal funds rate with quantitative measures of economic conditions that would warrant continuing that rate at its current very low level. specifically, the committee said that it anticipates that exceptionally low levels to the federal funds rate will be appropriate at least as long as the unemployment rate remains 6.5%, inflation between one and two years ahead is projected to be no more than committee's 2% longer-term goal and longer-term inflation expectations continue to be well-anchored.

i considered these thresholds for possible action a major improvement in forward guidance. they provide much more information than before about the conditions that are likely to prevail when the fomc decides to raise the federal funds rate. as for the date at which tightening of monetary policy is likely to occur, market participants, armed with this new information about the committee's reaction function, can form their own judgement and alter their expectations on timing as new information a cruise. these thresholds will, as a consequence, allow private sector expectations over the federal funds rate to fulfill an important automatic stabilizer function to the economy. if the recovery turns out to be stronger than expected, the

public should anticipate that one or both of these threshold ,alues will be crossed sooner and hence that the federal funds rate could be raised earlier. conversely, if the outlook for the economy unexpectedly worsens, the public should expect a later lived off in later lift off in rates. threshold guidance for the federal funds rate looks ahead to a time when the economy is healed from the worst effects of the financial crisis. getting back to more normal economic conditions will allow for a more normal approach to monetary policy, and i look forward to the day where we can put away our unconventional tools and return to what now seems like the relatively straightforward challenge of

setting the federal funds rate. at some point, it will be appropriate to cease adding to accommodation and, later, to begin the process of withdrawing the significant accommodation required by the extraordinary conditions caused by the financial crisis. i believe that once again, communication will play a central role in managing this transition. let me start with our current program of asset purchases, which was launched in september 2012 and revised in december. notably, the fomc has described this program in terms of a monthly pace of purchases rather than as a total amount of expected purchases. the committee has indicated that it will continue purchases until the outlook for the labor market has improved substantially in

the context of price stability. in its most recent statement, the fomc also indicated that the pace and composition of the purchases may be adjusted based on the likely efficacy and cost of these purchases as well as the extent of progress toward the federal reserve's economic objectives. in my view, adjusting the pace of asset purchases in response to the evolution of the outlook for the labor market would provide the public with information regarding the committee's intentions and should reduce the risk of misunderstanding and market disruption as the conclusion of the program draws closer. the federal reserve's ongoing asset purchases continually add thehe accommodation that

federal reserve is providing to help strengthen the economy. into those purchases means that the fomc has ceased augmenting that support, not that it is .ithdrawing accommodation when and how to begin actually removing the significant accommodation provided by our large holdings of longer-term securities is a separate matter. in its march statement, the fomc reaffirmed its expectations that a highly accommodative stance of monetary policy will remain appropriate for a considerable time after the current asset purchase program ends and the economic recovery has strengthened. that means that there will likely be a substantial period after asset purchases conclude but before the fomc start removing accommodation by

reducing asset holdings or raising the federal funds rate. to guide expectations concerning the process of normalizing the size and competence -- size and composition of our balance sheet, at our june 2011 meeting, the fomc laid out what it called exit principles. in these principles, the fomc indicated that asset sales would likely follow lift off of the federal funds rate. it also noted that in order to minimize the risk of market assettion, the pace of billed during this process could be adjusted up or down in response to changes either in the economic outlook for financial conditions. for example, changes in the pace or timing of asset sales could be warranted by concerns over market functioning or

excessive volatility in bond markets. while normalization of the federal reserve's portfolio is still in the future, the fomc is committed to clear communication about the likely path of the balance sheet. there will come a time when the fomc begins the process of returning the federal funds rate to a more normal level. in their individual projections submitted for the march fomc meeting, 13 of the 19 fomc participants saw the first increase in the target for the federal funds rate as most likely to occur in 2015, and another expected that to occur in 2016. but of course, the course of the economy is uncertain, and the committee added the thresholds for unemployment and inflation

in part to help guide the orlic if economic conditions developments warrant lift off sooner or later than expected. as the time of the first increase in the federal funds rate moves closer, in my view, it will be increasingly important for the committee to clearly communicate about how the federal funds rate target will be adjusted. i hope i have been able today to convey the vital role that communications plays in the federal reserve's efforts to promote maximum employment and stable prices. communication became even more significant after the onset of the financial crisis when the fomc turned to unconventional policy tools that rely heavily on communication. better times and a transition away from unconventional

monetarymay make policy less reliant on communication, but i hope and i of "never the days explain, never excuse" are gone for good and that the federal reserve continues to reap the benefits of clearly explaining its actions to the public. i believe further improvements in the fomc's communication are possible, and i expect they will continue, so let me stop there and thank you. it has been my privilege to share these thoughts with you, and i very much appreciate the invitation to join you today. [applause] >> i would like to thank janet for two things -- first for showing up here and speaking in a language approaching english -- the closest i have ever heard

from a fed open market committee person. and second, for saying you think prince has a future. if you can demonstrate that in the business model, we will carry out on our shoulders, and you will not have to worry about any government salary anymore. we all share.cern >> it is good that it is a common concern. if you look at the papers today, if you could offer, if you choose to, some sort of concise explanation for what in god's name is going on with the fed and this foreclosure and this consultants --h do you want to address that at all? >> yes, let me try to do so briefly. today, the gao issued a report fed for acized the flawed review of foreclosure

documents. i talked about procedures in monitoring firms. let me say this -- the fed undertook an independent for closure review in order to help borrowers who had been financially injured by server certification errors -- servicer errors. they took the lead in this effort because they supervised that werehe servicers involved. our prime objective was to get help to bar worse as quickly as we possibly could. over 4ed out that million borrowers were likely affected, and identifying and getting remediation to them turned out to be an immensely and costly process.

initially, we believed that the review was something that would help, but once we were in the midst of it, it became clear that the review was serving actually to delay getting meaningful help to borrowers. this is obviously a development but we were not happy with, when we realized that, we decided that we needed to go in a different direction, and we tried to take what we thought was the best available option at that point. so we are in the process of getting money quickly to borrowers, and that should be happening within the next weeks .nd months we think that that is the best option. the gao has provided some useful

recommendations for how we should continue working with the partervicers that were not of the recent settlement, and we will take those recommendations. >> if i could translate that always a riske -- -- does that mean that if you knew then what you know now you would have done it differently? >> absolutely. totally agree. >> very simply, what would you have done differently? be polite.i would i do not mean to trap you. >> perhaps, we would have taken an approach of a simpler categorization of harm, as we sendinge now, and payments more rapidly, not getting involved in detailed reviews -- >> more money, less process?

>> right. by money was being eaten up very costly reviews and spending money for consultants, and these reviews turned out to be commonly -- a file might be 2000 a reviewmore, and could take 10, 20, 30, 50 hours of a single file, and that turned out not to be a workable approach. we can let it go. if there are any questions, good luck, and try to get a better answer from her. your definition of inflation -- that of the fed -- is not the same as we write about in the newspapers. we write about the consumer price index. you use something called -- if i can remember this -- the

personal consumption expenditure index. you got it.ator, >> thank you. if you would advise us when we are writing our pci story to thatde pce, do you think would be helpful? i keep hearing complaints from people saying, "how can the fed said there is no inflation?" the wild swings are not in the pce index. >> the first thing i want to say is that when the fed thinks about inflation and underlying inflationary pressures in the economy, we do not just monitor one single index and blind ourselves to what is going on with the others. we routinely look at the consumer price index, the pce

price index, and a variety of other indices of inflation that try and give a good sense of what the underlying inflationary pressures are of the economy. while we have defined our longer run objectives to be concrete in price index,pce we, by no means, focus solely on one number. we look at a whole variety of indices. the second thing is that over most periods, all of these andces tell the same story give roughly the same signals about what inflationary pressures are in the economy. on most of theus index really pce move together very closely. the cpi is produced by the labor

department. it is the best-known index. by pce deflator is produced the commerce department, and i would be happy to point you to where you can find it. >> just do not charge me too much. >> it is free. >> thank god. >> and why did we choose the pce rather than the cpi? in point of fact, it is a more comprehensive index with what you call advantages. it covers a broader array of goods and services that the typical consumer buys than the cpi does. in particular medical health care expenditures are extremely important to consumers, and the cpi coverage is really, frankly, very limited. i think it is widely agreed that

better job of covering medicare costs that are important to typical consumers. it just so happens that over the last year, the pce index has increased about 1.3% over the last 12 months, whereas the cpi has increased about 2%. right now, at this point, there is a difference, and it partly reflects the fact that rents have been increasing, and the cpi gives a larger rate, but this is an aberration, and by and large, these indices do not tell different stories about the economy. >> thank you. now i have learned something. i am almost at the end of my questions. it will be somebody else's turn soon. one of the things that i icognize because i am old and saved is that the programs you had of holding down long-term

could displease my profit from the bond market , and theock market' trope i have used to write about this 1 billion times is in order to bail out the people who were imprudent, the fed ended up having to penalize prudent people who were trying to live off their savings. we talk about this, and it is a known problem. do you want to discuss the trade offs in that or any aspect of that? if it bothers you, which i'm sure it does. >> yes, i appreciate you raising this question. i am very well aware that this is an important and a legitimate concern for a lot of people, particularly retirees who want a have bankwho want to

deposits or hold cd's and the amount you can get on that is close to zero. we hear all the time, and it is natural and it is difficult, so there is no question about that. why do we do this? the reason we do it and we think it is in the best interests of the economy overall is because we think it is a way to stimulate a faster economic recovery. we think that will be good for virtually everyone in the economy, even including those who are suffering from low cd's.s on their when you think about people, they are not just one- dimensional. there's more to their lives. most people have some

investments in the stock market's or are expos in some , ando the stock market's the policies we have been pursuing probably have been good for stock market returns -- most people have some investments in the stock market or are exposed in some way to the stock market. even retirees barrault, if it is to refinance mortgage that helps them or to buy a new house, and they have children, and they have grandchildren. when they think about their children's and their families futures, what are they thinking about? i had a kid who is graduating from college and entering the job market. can my child or grandchild find a job? what about me if i want to supplement my income and work part-time? can i find a job? when people think about all the different concerns they had with the economy and all the different hats that they wear and think about what the broad

set of consequences is -- yes, the low rates of return on state deposits -- that is a cost, but there are a lot of other benefits. how are we going to get interest rates back up to normal levels? when we have a normal economy. when will we had a normal economy? when we are able to stimulate a strong enough economy to get things back to normal. >> i will not step on that exit line. that was very good. i will not even ask the rest of my questions because that is a good answer and it is getting late. it is now time for the house to ask -- just identify yourself, your organization. long winded ass i am. >> steve from fidelity

investments. thanks for joining us. a couple of interesting questions were raised on the panel this morning, and i wondered if i could get your reaction. one was that the fed's policy of cultural low rates was not effective enough stimulating the broader real economy and that it was being used to advantage mostly by institutions like banks and other players in that space -- the fed oppose a policy ultrathe fed's policy of low rates. i wondered if he could tell us your thoughts on that. it is either incorrect or ineffectual that the fed is mandated with two things -- stable prices and full employment -- and that the fed might be better off without the full employment mandate. can you talk about that as well? >> a great questions. i am happy to address them. with respect to the impact of our policies, do they have an effect on the economy -- look at what is happening in the economy? -- look at what is happening in

the economy. housing is beginning to recover in a way that i think is very impressive. house prices are going up, and they are going up more than i would have expected six months ago or even nine months ago, and i think it is making a whole lot of people feel a lot better about their financial situation. of course, housing prices are activity and housing is low, but it is beginning to rebound. look at consumer durables, purchases of cars. they have been holding up really well, even though at the beginning of the year, we had tax increases that you would have expected to negatively impact spending. people have to borrow to buy cars. i do not have any doubt that our policies are contributing to the lowest interest rates, weather it is borrowing for a car or

mortgage -- whether it is faring for a car or mortgage, we are looking at historic low interest rates. i believe that is not only caused by our policy, but our policy is contributing. that is what is going to get the economy moving. when we get more construction activity and more spending on cars and consumer durables, that creates jobs, and jobs create income, and when people have income, they feel better about their economic condition, and they spend, and that is the virtuous cycle we need to get this economy going. that is the purpose of our purchases, to get interest rates down, and i think it has been successful. there are a lot of studies, and i think the general conclusion -- while there is uncertainty

about how large the effects are, they virtually all come to the conclusion that on these purchases, and he has been helpful. bankers frankly come in and complain about low interest rates and say it is hurting them, not helping them. we could debate that, but i do not think that would be the general view you would find in the banking community. on the dual mandate, let me say this -- why should we be interested in unemployment and inflation? this is the mandate congress has given us. i am strongly supportive of it. if you ask the typical american what they care about -- do they care about inflation? absolutely. do they care about the job market and if they can find a job? absolutely. these are two things the

american public i think cares deeply about. most of the time, there is not the trade-off. think of now -- we are very focused on employment. we are very far from full employment, but is there a trade off in terms of inflation? no, inflation is running at or slightly below our target. i would say that at this point, there are many, many central banks around the world that have adopted what is called formal inflation targeting regimes, where their prime objective they have given him -- they have been given is to achieve a numerical inflation target over the medium run, but if you look at what they do and look at their mandate, you will see that for almost every one of those central banks, they are also encouraged to use monetary policy to support economic to theand job creation

extent that there are not serious, long lasting trade offs. if you look at the behavior of other central banks, the bank of england over the last several years would be a case in point. they are just as focused on both objectives, i would say, as we are. practically speaking, there really is not that much difference, if any, between what the fed is doing and what the major central banks are doing. >> i think we are going to have an auction process for the last question. i think we are out of time and kevin is going to shoot us. can we go along? go along, just like football. watchers right now, you are considered the favorite to follow ben bernanke, should he step down when his second term ends in january. if that were to happen, you would be the first woman to head the reserve in its 100-year history.

i will not ask about that because i know you will not comment, but the central banks in the world still remain an old boys' club. so does the broader economics offession, which is made up only about 1/3 women. do we need more women to lean in to economics and into the leadership positions at central banks, and what could that mean? >> thanks for that question. yes, at the highest levels of central banking, there are very few women, but i am pleased that the representation of women is increasing a lot at other levels, at lower levels of theral banking and in financial markets and institutions more broadly. program for a mba

, andshare of my career over the 20 or 30 years that i did that, the representation of women in those programs in general and in finance increased dramatically, and we are really seeing women get ahead and making a difference and moving up to the highest posts. i really think that this is something that is going to increase over time, and it is time for that to happen, and it is a great development. my name is greg fields. i am a research fellow. one of the things i am interested in your opinion on is why is there such a plodding pace of implementation in dodd- frank, and what are some of the institutional challenges for an organization like yours as that law is implemented?

>> well, it has been an enormous challenge to implement all that is in dodd-frank. as soon as the legislation was passed, we sat down and made a list of all that we had to do to 's part ofwhat the fed this was. we identified 252 separate projects. >> that is all? a there were items like voelker rule -- >> which nobody still understands. >> it was things like that followed by residential mortgages and other things that are really major efforts. first of all, there has been a huge agenda of work. first of all, it is complex, and we do not want to put rules into

effect that have not been .horoughly thought through we need to get input from the public, public reaction. we put out notices of proposed rulemaking for comment. we are working jointly with many other agencies here in the united states to develop these complex rules, and it often takes time to try to reach agreement. we want domestically a level playing field in terms of we all agree for different parts of the financial industry what the rules should be, but even more challenging and very important -- the financial industry is global, and we do not want to put in effect rules in the united states that will affect our institutions and to find that there are completely different rules in other parts of the world. ideally, we would like a level

playing field globally, and we do not want a set of regulations where as soon as we implement say, "leave the united states and go off to another country because our rules are tougher -- that firms will, say, leave the united states and go off to another country because our rules are tougher. we are working constructively and actively with regulators all over the globe to see if we can move together jointly. i have to say -- i understand when you say the process has been slow. it has been a couple of years now, but if you saw how much is going on and how much constructive dialogue is taking place and how we have got an agreement on so many important things -- enhanced capital requirements for globally active , reforms to derivatives,

liquidity standards -- i think we are really making a lot of progress. when you ask why that could not have been done in six months, we want to do this right and move forward jointly, and this is a great deal of what we are spending our time on. be surely done by 2015. am i wondered if you could comment on the bank of japan's aggressive monetary stimulus. do you think it will work? how does it change your view about the global economy? >> i prefer not to comment on the details of what the bank of japan announced, but i would certainly say that here is a country that suffered deflation

for well over a decade and had very weak economic growth. when you contemplate the fact that nominal income, nominal gdp in japan today is slightly lower than it was, i think, 20 years ago, that is really remarkable when it has resulted in all kinds of problems for japan. i really think that taking an aggressive approach to try to end deflation is something i understand. when you look at central banks in advanced countries -- the united states -- europe has a slightly different set of problems but very high unemployment -- the united kingdom with high unemployment -- weow growth, japan

really all face a common situation where we have had disappointed economic performance, and we are all us,ng steps -- all of different packages of monetary policy steps -- to try to address that, so i think that is something completely appropriate. about a month ago, the group of seven issued a statement because these policies can have some impact on exchange rates -- issued a statement saying, "we think it is entirely appropriate for countries to use domestic policy tools to promote key domestic policy objectives like trying to achieve full employment and price stability. in that sense, i think what japan is doing is something that is in their own best interests. it is something that if successful will be good for stimulating growth in the global

economy, and it will be good for us, too. >> last question. >> your speech said the 2005 growth rate did not lead to an overall increase in inflation because the public believed that the fed would keep inflation in check. what is the evidence of that, and do you think the public still has that faith in the fed? >> the evidence that people believed the fed would keep inflation in check -- we look at many different measures of inflation expectations, both survey-based evidence and weed outthat we try to --inancial market prices evidence we try to read out of financial market prices. we can see that inflation expectations remained extremely .table and well-anchored

the other thing we can see is that in contrast to the 1970's, although they were in sequence, they were sort of unexpected. 2005, world prices rose. people thought it happened once and it would be the last year. it turned out the next year and case, oiler, in each prices rose through a sequence of increases in oil prices. in each year, they were unexpected. forecasters were surprised. but one issue is, of course, we saw that show up in energy prices, but did we see any pastor -- passed through to other prices more broadly, so- called core inflation? and during all those years, there was little or no pastor f -- little or no passthrough

into core inflation -- >> we are not going to have a debate here. >> i guess -- i cannot prove this to you, but i would contrast this with the 1970's, when we saw shocks of that sort that induce workers to really try to protect themselves from what they thought was going to tryingnic inflation by to demand wage increases, which their employers gave, and pass through went to inflation, and he saw inflation expectations spike. we went into this set of oil shock increases in 2005 was now a decade and a half of a really

strong record in terms of having kept inflation of around 2%, and i think that was the difference, but i cannot disprove that there is some other theory that could explain the same thing. thank you.len, i hope you do not bill by the hour. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] >> [inaudible] >> tonight on c-span, a conversation about health care for military veterans. we will look at the rising cost to taxpayers and the care available to veterans. at 8:00 eastern, we will hear from former air force flight

nurse linda schwartz. she now oversees the connecticut veterans affairs department. one of the topics she discusses -- posttraumatic stress disorder. >> when you have the chief of the army, general odeon know, get up and say, "i had posttraumatic stress," it is ok .- general odierno as a naturalof it reaction to an abnormal -- va and shipper terry -- va and secretary shinseki are trying to get the end -- itat is posttraumatic stress. it should pave the way for you to get some help for the posttraumatic stress you are having. >> you can see all the remarks

tonight beginning at 8:00 eastern here on c-span. at 9:00, your calls and comments on veterans' health care with of the "military times." right now, you can weigh in on facebook. we are asking veterans what their experience has been with health care access and quality. /cspan.k.com >> they had a very political marriage. of would lobby in the halls congress. she was always very careful to say, "my husband believes this," and "my husband advocates that," but she herself was doing the pitch. one of her husband's opponents said he hoped that if james were ever elected president, she would take up housekeeping like

a normal woman, and she said, cassette and if james and i are ever elected, i will neither keep house nor make butter." >> one of the most influential first ladies, sarah polk. we will take your questions and comments by phone, facebook, and twitter. ies," live monday night on c-span. >> now we taking to the brookings institution for a discussion of women and the arab world. earlier today, tara sonenshine spoke about u.s. efforts to promote the rights of women and girls in the region. this is almost an hour. >> welcome to the center for middle east policy at the brookings institution. very glad to have you here. i am tamara wittes, director of

the center. i am truly delighted to welcome to our stage this morning under secretary of state for public diplomacy and public affairs, tara sonenshine. we are here just almost exactly on your 1-year anniversary joining the state department as under secretary for public diplomacy. what we wanted to do today was have an opportunity to delve the a particular aspect of sweeping change that is taking in the middle east. the arabs' awakening has brought tremendous opportunities and opening. it has also brought a great deal of anxiety and questions. i think on no issue is that mix of hope and anxiety more prevalent than around the status of women -- women's equality,

women's empowerment, women's rights in the middle east. just a week past the end of women's history month, we thought it was a good time to take stock of where things stand, of why this issue is important, and what the united of itsis doing as part broader support for change in the middle east. what is it doing to support the empowerment and equality of women and girls? i could not be happier than to have my friend, undersecretary tara sonenshine, here with us to help us address these questions. a longtime media professional, but she is also somebody who, throughout her career, has worked on, has written about, has spoken on issues of women's empowerment

and women's inclusion here in united states and in foreign brought thatshe deep concern and commitment to the issue of women's empowerment with her to the state department. she is, in her role as undersecretary, a champion for this issue in american diplomacy, continuing the work ,aid out by secretary clinton and the ambassador at large for global women's issues. tara came to the state department after a long and distinguished career in media, in strategic communications, and in diplomacy. she was executive vice president at the u.s. institute of peace, a communications adviser to a host of organizations involved in foreign affairs and diplomacy, including the

international crisis group, the american academy of diplomacy, and the international women's media foundation. many of you may are originally have come to know tara through her work at abc news, where she had a wonderful career as a producer of "nightline," as a reporter at the pentagon, and also as a contributing editor @ ."ewsweek -- at "newsweek for womeneen a voice for many years, and i am really delighted that you are here. the podium is yours. [applause] >> i want to thank you, tamara, for not only hosting me, but really, for so many incarnations

that we have worked on projects together, and you continue to be a role model for women and four men in foreign policy, and we thank you, and we applaud all you do, so thank you. [applause] well, i was hoping to start the speech by saying "spring has finally arrived," but i am going to drop that line. but i do wish that springwood fully arrived for the women of the middle east and north africa -- that spring would fully arrive. the region's population, many of whom were on the front lines of democratic change in -- theyunisia, libya are denied equal or even remotely equal roles after the

-- i amon, but fear not not going to deliver the speech you have heard a million times before about the importance of women. i think we are moving beyond that speech in to what i think of as the post-rhetoric stage of the issue. instead, i want to ask you a few provocative questions. about thereally care role of women in the arab world? beyond just feeling good about ourselves. if so, why? really, will the full inclusion of women, practically speaking, politically speaking, economically speaking -- is it really going to make a difference amid this uncertain ?- even chaotic -- transition

how will we know what success even looks like? let me break it down. on the first issue -- why care? yes, fairness and human dignity are universal values, but, you know, i notice we tend to embrace those values very strongly when it comes to talking about, like, the global economy. level playing fields. open rules. fairness. transparency. so men and women can compete on the basis of their talent and economic drive. what about in the broader sense of human rights? this week, former secretary hillary rodham clinton came to the stage at kennedy center, and

we were all reminded of her years ago int 20 beijing -- can you believe that was almost 20 years ago? remember how she put it so -- "human rights are women's rights, and women's rights are human rights once and for all." all, there is for a common set of liberties to which all human beings are entitled, and, yes, governments must enshrined, protect, and in force those liberties so everyone is accepted, all citizens treated equally under law, regardless of creed, color, or gender -- governments must enforce protect, and

those liberties. but it is almost 20 years later, and what is new to say under the sun? actually, a lot of data and research. we now have an evidence-based reality on the subject. study after study has confirmed that any country or region that ignores half of its population will undercut its chance of success politically, economically, and democratically. fact. someer fact -- there are demographic realities in the arab world. young people, including young people are ag disproportionate majority.

youth unemployment is among the ighest numbers globally, and see people shaking their heads because they know -- and you know that it will continue until at least 2030. these facts put in powering young people of both genders at the top of every single agenda. --'s stick with facts here young women are the largest cohorts in higher education in many countries, in many regions, and they are the next generation of human capital. if we limit that pool of the emerging problem solvers, we ,ill limit unique perspectives experiences, skills, and solutions.

we have to keep citing studies, statistics, and facts. according to a world bank study, women in the arab world have the lowest rates of employment of any region. the economies of the middle east will never reach their potential without women playing a significantly more active role in the workforce. ok, we have done the economics. let's go beyond economics. let's talk about extremism. that gets people sitting up higher in their chairs. women are frequently the ones most intimately connected in the community with families and neighbors. they are uniquely positioned to prevent extremist ideology from creeping in their communities.

most are the communities' frequent teachers of respect and tolerance, and they can bring their attributes to more than the so-called women's issues. they are good at conflict resolution, economic management of a household income, and .olitical leadership all across the region, we are seeing women taking the initiative. women like a 34-year-old mother of three from yemen, a co- recipient of the nobel peace prize in 2011 for nonviolent efforts to enhance women's safety, human rights, and peace building. developmentster of .nd international cooperation

like a doctor who has a science camp, go girls, bringing educational opportunities and scholarships to women in the palestinian territories. can you please help imagine an if these women are no longer just a short list of individual exceptions but regular citizens building infrastructures for democracy, freedom, dignity, prosperity, and innovation? it is essential in today's era of world that women actually govern. in yemen, you could say that 20% of the delegates for the national dialogue are women, but

the truth is they hold very few of the real decision making seats. women only have three out of 72 seats in the opposition .oalition in syria egypt. egypt. .istoric, important egypt the abuse of women has violated to only bodies but rights free expression and the right to fully take part in their country's transition. only about nine women legislators won seats in parliamentary election, and it has been left off and two women in civil society, women like the national council of women, to stand up against official pronouncements that distort

religion and deny rights to women. there is also what is frustrating to many of us and internal conundrum about all this. what is the conundrum? women are needed in decision- making circles to bring about political change. but until there is political change, women have difficulty attaining influential political .ositions i hope what i am doing for you is helping you to help women who are finding their voice to build possible solid case for their inclusion because the evidence could not be more clear cut. women are the bellwether, the barometer, and the building

bricks of greater economies, yes, we should, care because they care, and because they and us are in charge of building a safer and more secure world. we should care because when we stop caring, when we stop talking about it, governments and economies backslide. women are sidelined, further marginalized, and there is and can be retreat. here is what happens when there is retreat on these issues -- failed expectations, violence, suppression of rights, everyone

poss writes. the cost of systemic discrimination and the failure to harness the contributions of women will have consequences for prosperity, stability, and violent extremism. -- two weeksgo ago, i had the opportunity to sit with 16 young women from the middle east and northern africa. they were here on a state department international leadership program. they come to the united states to meet with other american entrepreneurs and networks and government and civil society folks. you have got to look at their faces and their resumes. parliamentarian, members of cities -- members of civil society, doctors, election

monitors, and they are in the trenches of pushback, hostility, and institutionalized resistance. they asked me to tell you they do not believe in retreat. the women from egypt were particularly moving and laying out for me there challenges. -- their challenges. he talked about teargas. they told me they experience it almost every day. they told me teargas comes in different colors. sometimes the month they said, it is the kind that burns your skin or takes your breath away. , "i think we are getting addicted to it here "om.

but they did not joke about was horrific rate and sexual violence in their -- rape and sexual violence in their countries. i did not ask how it happened. they asked if i would listen to how it happened. they described men around women like a pack of ballplayers in a huddle. one by one, they would take turns raping. we are following these ,evelopments in egypt closely no more so than secretary cary -- kerry. eval at his confirmation hearing to carry forward secretary clinton poss -- he valid at his confirmation hearing to carry forward secretary clinton's

work. he said this week, and i quote, "president obama and his administration share concerns about the direction egypt appears to be moving in, but it is our hope that there is still time to turn the corner, that the recent arrests, the violence in the streets, the lack of in -- the lack of inclusivity and public ways that make a difference to all people of egypt -- that is a concern today." as we condemn attacks everywhere in the world and urge governments to prosecute those responsible thomas we recognize -- responsible, we recognize that sexual violence is endemic to society not only in egypt, but in memory parts -- in many parts of the world. not only in cities, but rural communities. let's not have a fully downer day here.

i am pleased to note that many of the 16 women also shared some good news stories. one moroccan woman told me she is the youngest female parliamentarian in morocco. she looked about 12, but i am sure she was not. she was the first girl in her village to go to school to attend a university, become elected to public office. she said she is determined to make sure her exceptional story becomes every moroccan girl normal moroccan girl's story here is another girl from iran and skate her country during the green movement demonstrations -- escaped from her country during the green movement demonstrations. i heard stories of transforming societies, echoed by women like the minister of social affairs

in sudan who is working to protect children from other legislator from a rack who says -- from iraq who says she is fighting for the widowed women and the disabled, a palestinian woman working on higher education. there was something unanimous and all of their stories, something they all agreed on -- we want freedom, and most of all, we want dignity. it was interesting that words mean things to these women. you have to be very capital with word choice -- very careful with word choice. i said to them i prefer now to talk about the gender space, not so much the women space. it just seems like we are beyond the space and a corner. oh, no, they said. to take thatready out of the,"

lexicon. they want us to continue to talk about women and make sure they are not sidelined, abused, or marginalized. they told me that women are the keys. they want free, fair, and transparent economies, right for women and girls to go to school. ,hey want our civil society foundations and government to promote change, to integrate them into peace and security building. they want us to share lessons on preventing gender-based violence, and they want us to do more to increase their civil societies. but i am focused on in this job, and i hope to chat more with you about, is trying to stitch together all that we do in the u.s. government.

how do you put it all into some copperheads of tapestry to show what we are doing to support societies and to create outcomes we can measure lester mark -- we can measure? we do so much, but at times, it is so disparate. we work in the middle east. we work with ministers at the foreign peace in tunisia. we have a robust middle east partnership initiative, and arab women's leadership institute, we are training officials, journalists, lawyers. we are doing so much. our embassies are out there every day meeting with women, leading workshops, trying to help displaced persons in iraq, mentor and libyans after the democracy elections, training leaders.

how do you make all that ec and be real? we have an office, special representative to muslim communities, creating networks of changemakers. an office of global women's issues. we have a community of democracies, a women in public service roger. it feels almost an list -- almost endless. how do we explain that all because that all mentors emerging leaders in powerful ways? i want to leave you with a couple of stories. a young woman from rocco now spearheads -- from more rocco now spearheads -- from morocco now spearheads swift demonstrations in her company. another woman wants you to know she is now a political advisor in the iraqi government.

olivia and woman want you to know that she has joined -- a libyan woman wants you to know that she has joined the education ministry. she has heard our call for female representation in parliament and education. we have all of the programs of , theea, eca, cs cc alphabet soup, women's mentoring, our sports, film, art, culture, tech women, tech girls -- i could go on and on. how do we know it all works in the end? you have to track the graduates of all these programs. what do they end up doing? what do fulbright women end up going west to mark what did tech women end up doing? haveates of the program started to share their data and experience.

two women who asked that i referred to them only a spot on , arely as fatma and nokia out there today -- and nokiadia are out there teaching computer skills to poor students who have never seen a computer. stories like this give us confidence and evidence and equipment will progress -- and incremental progress. thank you to the efforts of women in civil society. thank you for helping on tunisia, removing the objection and what was the convention on the elimination of all forms of discrimination against women, helping navigate that and draftg into tunisia's constitution, something that affirms women as equal rather than complementary. thank you for the work you are

doing to help us on humanitarian assistance in syria. it is challenging to work in syria and in the refugee camp's with awe are working local coordinating communities inside syria to mobilize nonviolent activists. where are we at the end of the day? we are making gains. .ootholds, toe holds and it is important to remember the progress which seems -- seemed so unimaginable years ago, and remember our own our american suffragette, susan b anthony, who once wrote, "the women of this nation in 1876 have greater cause for discontent, rebellion, and revolution than the men of

1776. 100 years after our democratic revolution, 50 years before women could vote. we have still got work to secure rights for people of every creed, color, and gender. it is inevitable. building a democracy takes time , but please do not stop talking about it. do not stop pushing. do not stop working for women in this region. they want our help here it they seek our help or if they need our help. rights are not just rights. they are necessary. countries all over this world will be stronger when everyone has a stake in the global system. it is about success.

we are going to clamp these habits of democracy -- plant these habits of democracy into the soil of every region. then maybe hours ring will bloom and a real arab spring -- maybe our spring will bloom and a real arab spring will bloom beside it. thank you very much. i look forward to your questions. >> thank you so much. you put allowed out on the table for us and a lot of influential stories from women you have spoken with -- have spoken with across the middle east. let me start with something that was a much discussed aspect of the arab awakening. it is an issue i know you are very involved with, which is technology.

technology is thought to be a tool for empowerment, certainly when you think about women in traditional societies or societies that face barriers to public participation, technology can preach those barriers. i wonder if you can give us a bit of a sense of the way the u.s. government is using technology to reach out to women in the middle east. somen the last 24 hours, of you may have seen technology .n action let me ask -- answer the question broadly and then give you some specifics. a year ago, when i came in, i understood that secretary clinton and currently secretary john kerry are committed to what is called 21st at three statecraft -- 21st-century

statecraft, a marriage of technology and policy. i came in knowing we were going to be a state department in the midst of tweets, blogs, facebook, google hangouts, face chats, e-mail exchanges. there was a conversation going on in the world and our secretary of state -- secretaries of state want us out there in those conversations. but those conversations happen very quickly. policy sometimes happens very slowly. one of the challenges is matching the time frames. , and others this may be more interested in the specific cases of windows timelines sync up and when they do not, but this technology is both useful in conveying who you are, what you are, what you stand for, what your valleys --

your values are. this technology is useful in hearing from people what they think is important and what they need. it is useful in creating dialogs, online education, online training, virtual exchanges, english language teaching in a mobile phone. what i always say is that technology is not good or bad. in the end, it is somebody's dutchmen. it is just -- it is somebody's judgment. it is just a piece of equipment, but what you do with it -- diplomacy isf something that is carefully managed, every word weighed, and in a 21st-century environment, it is also -- an it is often

impossible to weigh every word. there's a certain certain amount of risk that comes along with embracing these tools. one of the things i found interesting when i was at the state department and i am sure you confront every day is how you embrace that risk and live with it. >> it is interesting because as a recovering journalist i know that people love to focus on two things. one, journalists love stories about media. they also love when things go wrong. in the hundreds of thousands of tweets and facebook pages that in the last year i have seen built, created, disseminated, distributed, people have gone out from and the seas -- from embassies and, per the most part, it has gone well. on a couple of occasions, it has not. no surprise -- feeding frenzy by folks focusing on this look

like -- looked like a cliglitch between this tweet and that tweet. some of that can be serious, so it is a no joke area. but we are encouraging embassies to be out there, that you cannot hide under your desk or computer, because the conversation is going on around you. >> in a way, even when there are bobbles, it is an opportunity to engage honestly. sometimes the most important diplomacy is not going to be the stuff that is carefully managed. it is going to be the stuff that breaks out. , what if it goes wrong encourage officials all a time his own it. if it was a glitch, say it was a glitch. the worst thing is when you try to craft an answer that is non- glitchy and might be glitzy,

but what you really want to say is, "i was and who is -- "that was an oops." >> when we talk about having an ominous -- an honest conversation, you are very honest and outspoken about your thoughts on sexual violence. this is an issue that is tough to talk about in societies that andace traditional values in the societies in the arab world that are undergoing change because the stakes are seen as so high. i remember that during the egyptian revolution women participating in protests was an important signal, not only to other women and families, but to men. if there are women at the demonstration, that means this is a big deal and i should be there to.

to some people, to see women at a demonstration meant that it was safe, but i also remember talking to a woman last year about her leadership in the demonstrations in yemen. she said it was almost a way of shaming the man and saying, "we are out here risking it, so where are you?" rings to mine whether some of the sexual violence we have seen in egypt as a way not only -- it brings to mind what are some of the sexual violence we have seen in egypt is a way not only of bringing women to fear, but suppressing protests as a whole. >> it is not only women who are raped and violated. men and boys can experience the same thing you're it certainly not in the same numbers. -- can experience the same thing.

certainly not in the same numbers. the hardest thing is getting women to talk about these issues of sexual violence, rape. it is not just the arab world. i was recently in delhi shortly after the terrible bus incident. i was with young people at our american center in delhi, and teenaged and early 20s boys and girls, and i asked them what they would like to talk about. they said can we talk about the righape? or so i was surprised. they said we have trouble talking about this at home with their parents and grandparents, and we are not always sure where the lines are. the young boys, in particular, said it is not a comfortable subject at home or in school. --ess we get dialogue going

we're sometimes focused on changing changing laws and legislation and training police officers and reporting of rapes and implementation -- sometimes it is getting young people to have a conversation where they can express their own confusion about where lines are and what is allowed and what it means. promoting dialogue is one of the most powerful tools of public diplomacy to wrestle with hard issues. sometimes the best lace to wrestle with those issues -- best place to wrestle with those issues is that the theater come on a stage, any reading of a drama, in a film, tv show. about how be creative to have those conversations. >> those are tools you have at your disposal as well.

before the event today, we solicited some questions from .ur audience around the world we invited people to submit questions on our website. i have a couple of those i would like to share with you. one that came in from california is about tradition .nd being progressive through the ages, why haven't women and progressive man been more successful at modernizing traditionally male-dominated societies? you referred in your remarks to a long struggle here in the with changing our social norms and traditions. is this about progressivism and culture or rights?

>> i am going to borrow from joe biden. some of us got to hear vice president biden as a vice president and a man speak to this issue the other night at the vital voices conference. he said that part of why this has taken so long is there are great movements in every century. there are great struggles that dominate the conversation. he referred back to, in our country, it was the civil rights movement. captivateded -- it and swept the united states into a real conversation about civil rights. then he got into the top -- then centurynto the 20th

and world wars and totalitarianism and fascism. these were big conversations. he believes, i believe, i think a lot of us believe that this gender equality issue is going to be this century's conversation. it has made its way slowly to the forefront. what secretary clinton did by insisting that the part of american follower -- american foreign policy, institutionalizing an office for, you need to galvanize people. it cannot be a little bit here and there. when it starts to get traction, it is a gigantic conversation. it is a speech at brookings with men and women, people from across disciplines and c-span covering it, then you know it is part of the foreign policy conversation. but it takes moving it from the periphery to being right out there in your face every single

day. i think this one is catching on. it will be about laws and we will argue about culture and tradition and what is a progressive and what is a feminist and what is a women's issue and the gender issue, and that is all great. but it means we are having the conversation. >> we are having the conversation. so the point is everyone should have the ability to have a seat at the table, whether they have a traditional perspective, a religious perspective, progressive perspective come out whatever label you put on it. >> absolutely. >> that takes us to another question that came in over the web, which is that, "what do you say to the many men and women in these countries who support a more islamic version of women's roles?" >> the research, when you look

across political parties, ,eligions, social movements what is interesting is that you cannot classify anything as purely progressive on women or not. you cannot say all islamist parties agree that on women, xy z. i'm convinced we have to do this by the old words and deeds test, not by what your party label is or political group. do you a spouse violence? you either do or you do not hear -- do you think women are equal to men? you either do or do not. your laws and actions are going to flow from that. that, to me, it is a better way to come at this and saying do

you believe in this book or this political ideology. this one becomes pretty obvious when you do not believe in women's rights therein it is not hard to tell -- women's rights. it is not hard to tell. i do not think we want to get trapped into those boxes. >> let me open it up to questions from the audience. as usual, i will ask you to things -- first, please identify yourself, and second, keep it brief and make sure it is a question. why don't we start here in the front row? >> voice of america. ,hank you for your presentation which you shared with us the challenges facing women within

the arab awakening, but what is needed to be known is what could the united states do in terms of combating the decline in human rights and women's rights without having the perception of interfering with the internal affairs of the arab countries? --most important question how do we not appear? those are the wrong terms. is you reversed the ,aradigm and support the local indigenous voices. the activist. the civil society organization. 's. ngo , they know women what they want. they do not want to be raped and

they can -- they do not want to be insulted. they do not necessarily have the form, the voices and resources of moving the meter. we have to work through them. there are certain things we have to do as a country. in the case of egypt, there are urgent needs. they need wheat, they need to eat, they need fuel. we cannot just not meet the urgent need in the society from a governmental level but from a public diplomacy level, we have all these actors on the international stage, business journalists, foundations, coal troll people, artists, they can be amplifiers. and i think we have to support them. >> when i took over the program

in 2009, it had four pillars. one was the women's pillar. one of the things we did is be eliminated the women's pillar. why? women's to integrate empowerment across all of our areas of programming. i do not see it as a standalone priority. if you take seriously the notion that women's inclusion is essential to economic success, political success, security, then you have to integrate it. you cannot treat it as a standalone issue. andmember being in kuwait meeting with the young woman who was in law school. she had come from a very traditional family in a rural area and it had taken her two years to persuade her father to let her go to ball school. , remember thinking to myself

that is her battle. i cannot persuade her father to let her go to law school. her struggle is to persuade her father but my struggle is to make sure that when her family gets to that point where they have evolved in their conversation, that she has opportunities to go. and that she has opportunities to be successful. understandcan all our roles but we can understand them best when we do that listening and we get inside the challenges in each society and community. so that the work the state department does or ngo's do is responsive to the battles that individuals are fighting every day at home. let's see. right here in the navy blazer. yeah.

we'll do two. >> hi. from the state -- department activities, what can be do to influence the men? they are the ones having the problem. supporting the women and bringing them up is great but the thing we have to change is the men's behavior. >> ok. a couple rows behind him. hi. qu question follows on two estions asked before. work through the connections they have with their families, they have a real influence on a lot going on, whether it is counterterrorism with the development of

integrating women into society. how do you think that we can better integrate women who don;'t't have support from the family or the community in general through their daily interactions, whether it is taking their kids to school or working with other women in their communities? to them aboutak making a difference in their community without really changing what they are doing in their daily lives? >> poker wonderful questions. -- both are wonderful questions. i love the fact that you are here. these audiences used to be women, 90%. that has really changed. the first things that men are participating because as i love to look at that word, women,

men are in it. literally. so they have to be in the conversation. ,s these conversations expand we go around, i go around the country. universities are the best places for me to have these conversations because you have people who have not yet graduated. they are going out into the workplace. will havethat they different expectations and the work they will do overseas will be with a mindset around these issues. the younger up to grades, we have to have boys and girls talking about these issues earlier. it is hard. it is hard to do it at your kitchen table, in your classroom, but this is where it begins. marvelous thatst we can have these conversations. in terms of those who are not

quite connected, not every woman in a rural village trying to raise six kids is online doing the virtual program. part of what we are trying to do out andthese programs make the mobile. we have some americans cases now which tell you about some of the work and the things available. they are on wheels. you literally have to move around the country and get into a village. -- and respect in afghanistan what a village has as its codes of conduct. but you have to go with that universal sense that there are certain universal rights of expression, rights under the with justs that come human dignity and freedom. the right to information.

all of this is about information first. information is oxygen. a society breeze. if you are cut off from information, you are cut off. and of it is information initiatives and resources and pulling together government and nongovernment and making this a central part of our international policy. thank you for the opportunity to be with all of you. brookings for having me and i hope we will keep going. >> thank you for being with us and thank you for all the work you do. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] --p://twitter.com/cspanwj

[captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] >> tonight, i conversation about health care for military veterans. a look at the rising cost to taxpayers and the care available to veterans. -- lindaformer schwartz. one of the topic she discusses, the effect of multiple appointments on service members and their families. the areas, i have veterans who come home to try to get them their disability compensation

and somebody comes along and tells him all they have to do is sign this paper, stock your va benefits and you get another torture rack and afghanistan. are not that the troops and not rereading -- we not meeting the quotas, have no idea what the far- reaching effects of these multiple employment -- d on thents, not jsut ont hust military members themselves but on the family. one million children in america have had one or both parents -- deployeed 9/11

d since 9/11. teachers have to become aware of some of the important parts of what employment -- what deployment means on the family. america is in a good position right now. everybody is thinking about this and concerned about it. that is wonderful. this is a game changing moment for health care and veterans and more -- in america. you as the community people, you are going to be the first line of identifying who these folks are. the va does not take care of families yet. when you have a healthcare system designed by congress bringing in the family does not seem to be politically prudent.

>> you can see all of linda schwartz's remarks tonight beginning at 8:00. at 9:00, you're calling comment on veterans health care with patricia kime of the military times. phil rowe.sentatives right now you can weigh in on facebook. ,/c-span.cp,/ -- editor of the nationa nation magazine on how the obama administration is handling gun control and other issues. also i conversation on growing --ed -- growing diced the

growing diabetes. and the food and health correspondent at npr. washington journal is live every day at 7:00 a.m. eastern. >> now joining us to continue our discussion on the situation ,n korea, michele flournoy former defense undersecretary for the obama administration. certain in that capacity from 2009 until 2012. , are wey flournoy mobilizing for war? no, absolutely not. what you're seeing is a regular exercise we hold a most every year. i think there is a desire on the part of the administration to signal our strong support and close ties to south korea and so forth. if anything, right now everybody

thes to try to turn down tensions. >> are these tensions different than in the past? >> they are and they aren't. seen cycles of provocation before from north korea, both from the previous leader in the previous leader before that. what is new this time is that we have a new, young, inexperienced leader in place it was right now very worried about consolidating his own , and some with play two constituencies but is also an experienced in terms of knowing how to manage this. the worry is that because about lack of experience experience, he could potentially miscalculate.

>> me know that as a strong party, -- we know this is a strong party. every time we see a change of power in north korea, we have seen a cycle of product -- of provocation where the leader try to validate our gain. a military that likes to do some chest beating and mike to see a strong leader. we have any contact with the north korean military? >> there have been efforts in we dost at this point, --

not know whether this is a temporary measure to try to get the attention of the west, get it to focus on their needs and demands or whether this is a fundamental change. >> what is the role in china and all of this? >> china is very important in this equation. -- china assists north korea with its economic development. china is probably best position to influence north korean behavior. they have been willing to use that leverage in tactical ways to tamp down tension. we like to see china playing a more strategic role to help this new north korean leader understand that there are limits to the provocation and to the behavior.

he is risking instability. host: are there chinese troops in north korea? guest: not to my knowledge. there are lots of exchanges. host: to the chinese feel threatened in the pacific? guest: the greatest concern is for instability. having thousands of north korean refugees pour across the border. that is what they are trying to avoid. the chinese tried to get more engaged to tamp things down. in terms of u.s. presence, they have a dual point of view.

they understand the historic u.s. role and they appreciate that. that stability has enabled their own economic growth. they do not want the united states to put more forces in the region because they feel that is a counterbalance and they contain a strategy. that is their perception when we build up military forces. host: michele flournoy served as defense undersecretary for several years. phone numbers are on the screen. you can dial in. chuck hagel spoke at the national defense college yesterday. [video clip]

>> they have nuclear capacity now. they have missile delivery capacity now. and so as they have ratchet up their bellicose dangers rhetoric and some of the actions they have taken present a real clear danger and threat to the interests of our allies starting with south korea and japan. and also the threats the north koreans have leveled directly at the united states regarding our base in guam, threatened hawaii, threatened the west coast of the united states. as secretary of defense, we take those threats seriously.

we have to take those threats seriously. we have had serious responses to those threats. host: michele flournoy? guest: i think the secretary is it right. the united states has to take seriously the threats from north korea. very prudent action has been ordered to increase our defenses by the president. sending additional ballistic missile ships into the region. we do not know where this unproven north korean leader is going to go. we don't know if he is going to miscalculate. better to be safe than sorry.

and to reassure our allies of our defense. host: from the newspaper. guest: i think we're not at the point to be having that discussion. you would have to think many steps down the road. how would north korea respond? seoul is so close to the north korean border. there are some money missiles aimed at the south korean capital. you would have large numbers of civilian casualties immediately. we have to be careful. i am not saying that option should be off the table.

we do not want to go there unnecessarily. my reading of this tends period is that you are seeing a new north korean leader plane to a set of constituencies trying to get the attention of the west to come to the negotiating table so he can get some assistance, something for his country in exchange for something on a nuclear front. host: do you believe the u.s. should have talks with north korea? guest: we eventually will get to some negotiations with north korea. we got into negotiations with north korea.

we would provide them with assistance to stop doing something on the nuclear program. then there would start doing it again a couple years later. we do not want to keep buying the same horse when it gets out of the barn. we have to ratchet back this rhetoric. north korea has to calm things down. they have to come to the table seriously. how will they get back into compliance? host: ken in new york. caller: thank you so much. i've been on hold a while.

regarding peter king, there are lots of intelligent people in my state but peter king is not one. mr. rogin commented that russia and china appear to have the need to maintain the status quo in north korea. i was hoping he would elaborate on that. are the citizens of north korea as in the dark as we are led to believe? guest: great questions. my sense is the civilian population in north korea is not given much real news and no access to the outside world. they are fed a steady diet of propaganda according to the state.

most do not believe they know what is going on. in terms of russia and china, you can make an argument it is in their interest to see a peaceful resolution on the korean peninsula and the end of hostilities and more unified korea. they both have economic interests in north korea. russia has been given access to a key port. china has a number of mining concerns. very inexpensive labor from north korea. both countries are concerned about change that would bring instability. they tend to take a short-term perspective to manage the status quo.

what remains to be seen is whether that will be tenable with this new leader. host: we have a tweet from monty. guest: i think the program is about regime survival. this is a family dynasty. they want to maintain their hold on power. they believe that this would be there ace in the whole if it came to conflict. that is what this is really about. it is not a legitimate defense concern. south korea has given up their nuclear weapons program.

it has pursued a peaceful nuclear program but give up the weapons option. there is no one directly threatening the north koreans with aggressive action or with nuclear action absent its own irresponsible behavior. host: this is from yesterday's "the wall street journal." guest: i think the general view is the more countries develop their own nuclear fuel cycles, the more places there will be for weapons usable material to fall into the wrong hands.

what the administration wants people to do is to move people to an international fuel cycle where countries are able to buy nuclear fuel for civilian purposes in a safe and secure cycle. the united states should be pushing back on south korea's request. we have extended our deterrence we have made it clear our nuclear arsenal also covers our alliance commitment to them. our deterrent is their deterrent. host: edward from florida. michele flournoy is our guest. caller: greetings. i was stationed on the dmv with

the dmz with the eighth calvary, president of.the with the treata left sury. we had martial law for some time. north korea is an army with a country. south korea is a country with an army. and main source of income for north korea is the counterfeiting of american $100 bills. one of our missions was to cut off two-man subs that were heading down from north korea into south korea with currency to buy trade secrets or whenever.

north korea is an aggressor. we have been on a posture of defense since the 1950's. we have been on a posture of defense since the 1950's. north korea has always infiltrated through tunnels. the north korean special forces would come across our lines and still objects, take back to their commanders, similar to the native american tribes. host: let's hear from michele flournoy. guest: thank you for your service. south korea is now a thriving democracy. our alliance with them is very much in a defensive posture. we did not have an aggressive

posture towards north korea. these cycles of provocation have been started by north korea and perpetuated by north korea as an attention getting device. we need to be a very clear. this is not a situation where the united states or south korea has openly threatened north korea. we have called upon them to come back into compliance with the international obligations that they signed up for in the nonproliferation treaty. host: have you been to north korea? guest: i have not. host: have you been to the dmz? guest: yes.

host: how close did you get? guest: you can see the other side through binoculars. it is like stepping back in time to the period of when the armistice was declared. it is a strange time warp to be there. it is a reminder of the fact that this war and never came to an end. it has been to a halt. host: how did you get involved in defense policy? guest: i came out of graduate school -- host: oxford? guest: oxford. i got into the whole issue of nuclear arms control and so forth and started out in the

think-tank world and had an opportunity to serve in the clinton administration. host: and in the obama administration. you work for the think tank that you founded. guest: a consulting firm and i work with them to build their public sector. host: kelly, thank you for holding. caller: hello. i have a statement. i'm not smart enough to solve all the world's problems. my cousin has a book. osama bin laden, we're looking at kim jong un.

the americans here are held hostage by the sequester and the budget. government is not spending money on defense. my husband was laid off last september. he did government defense work. we only have 50 nuclear subs. we knew something like this would happen. we are not spending money on defense. it doesn't make sense to me not to defend the country, especially when you knew these lunatics would rise out of the ashes. i feel we're at an unfair advantage. guest: we are in a volatile security environment.

there are many challenges to u.s. security around the world from the continuation of al qaeda and terrorism and what we're seeing in north korea and the instability in the middle east. today you have a u.s. military that remains the strongest of the most capable in the world. a key question is how much is enough to spend on defense? how do we make sure what we spend on defense goes to defend our interests, instead of wasteful business practices. very sorry to hear about your husband being laid off. we're going through a profound period of adjustment. defense spending comes under budgetary constraints that we have not seen in decades.

host: how significant was the speech yesterday by chuck hagel? guest: i applaud what he said. as we contemplate getting our economic house in order, defense has to be on the table. it is 20% of the budget. we've got to anticipate a period of constrained resources for defense. we need to go after the bloat in the defense. acquisition reform, costs that are out of control. these are key areas we need to look for money first before we start cutting readiness.

i thought it was an important speech. he lay down some intent about what he intends to do as secretary. it was important for the american people to understand. host: we have a tweet from r harringon. guest: we have a close alliance with japan in northeast asia. very cooperative planning and exercises. very close relationship. we are keeping japan very much in the loop and a supported a closer relationship between

japan and south korea. host: is there still a distrust there? there are still some popular opinion that is wary of each other. there is much greater discussion. they realize in virtually every situation that able encounter going forward in the region, they will find ourselves to be allies. at then your time pentagon, did you ever speak with a north korean official? i did not. we did have some who are authorized who did have some conversations. i was not one of those people. host: did they ever visit the pentagon? guest: no. and i was not invited to pyongyang. here is a tweet.

this is an agency effort. there is a strong core group agency that includes the security staff and representatives from the state department and pentagon. this is a policy where tight is absolutely critical and we send a clear message. the diplomatic outreach he's is critical. you have seen secretary kerry weigh in on this. messages to the north and the south. this is a team effort. host: is that significant? .uest: it is it is an important symbol that we are focused and we are here. he are standing by our allies. we are here. we are the united states.

we will make good on our commitments and do everything tamp down the tensions. host: joe in d.c. go ahead. caller: good morning. you have articulated a big a partisan consensus for the past couple of decades regarding china's role in north korea and the nuclear missile program. the concerns of the world regarding north korea's behavior. powerless toably do anything about it? andn china's leverage economic terms over north korea, it is difficult to understand why china could not control north korean behavior because the regime does not wish to commit political suicide. i think an alternative

explanation is that china has seen a strategic interest in the north korea program. it has given china the opportunity to play the role of the responsible international stakeholder. in everyartner negotiation. participation in as program in the past secretary panetta's testimony anticipating the missile program, do you not see that china is planning -- playing a different game? host: thank you. guest: china does not control the actions of north korea, but they are certainly not powerless. the united states needs to engage them as administration has done to try to use the leverage that china does have.

what did they will see is more and more u.s. military to the abilities being deployed to the region in support of south korea and japan. we need china to weigh in with pyongyang and try to relieve tensions. they do have leverage. i think the new leadership in china is pragmatic and very so you can focus on domestic challenges economically and politically. we need to engage them as much as possible and pressed them to do more. weets to you. why does south korea need to get permission from the u.s. to acquire nuclear material?

this is common u.s. policy and reasons for animosity. they have made certain commitments under a treaty. they have sought technical assistance and support from the united states. the agreement we signed with them is under that agreement that we have mutual obligations including consultation on these issues. host: caller from new york. democrat line. go ahead. caller: hi. i question of north korea is one of stability. propaganda seems to be about getting political power. isill point --at what point there so much propaganda where he cannot go to the negotiation

table? does it get to the point where he does not know how to handle the situation? guest: that is the risk. the seeds of instability in north korea have been there for a long time. i remember my first intelligence briefing at the pentagon back in 1993. it predicted the potential collapse of north korea even back then. much of the population is starving. he had virtually no economic development. huge inequality between the elite and the masses. no real political participation. beenily dynasty that has brutal and repressive in its regime. all of the seeds for instability are there. but they have been there for a long time. i would not underestimate the ability of this regime to keep a

hold on domestic unrest. uno think if kim jong overplays his hand with these provocations, there could be miscalculation. that is what we have to worry about. host: most of this morning's "washington journal" discussing the situation in north korea. earlier we spoke with josh ro gen. that we are speaking with michele flournoy, former under defense secretary for the clinton and obama administrations. , an ambassador from the bush administration. he served as an ambassador to the philippines during the clinton administration. when you look at these numbers of what north korea's military is, more than one million troops in uniform, 8 million or so

reserves and ready to go, 4000 vessels in the navy. what do we know about the capability? guest: they have very substantial artillery, missile, rocket capability. that is the most worrisome thing in terms of their ability to strike. .hey can strike japan or guam they have a lot of hardware. estimates are that there are elements that are ready. they would have difficulty in logistics and any prolonged conflict. i do not think anyone believes that they would be successful in launching aggression. the problem is that if the

,ggression was defeated there'd be very high casualties on both sides. no one wants to see that. from usas is a map today. it shows different sites in north korea. underground nuclear test sites and suspected chemical weapons. what is the intelligence about this area? the u.s. government has a pretty good sense of how the nuclear program is laid out. many of the chemical and biological weapons and so forth i think are probably uneven in terms of the exact nature and the elements of the program. we will probably have the best picture on the nuclear program.

what is disturbing is that they seem to be pursuing plutonium weapons and also a weapon for high enriched uranium. and 2009, 72%- of u.s. adults think north korea is capable of launching a missile that would be able to hit the u.s. cnn poll. long-rangee is a missile system. the worry is that they're able to create a missile and miniaturized nuclear weapon to go on top of that missile. it would be concerning. i do not know anyone who believes they are at the light right now. you have seen as a precautionary measure that they recently ordered our national missile system to increase interceptors

from 30 to about 44. to be able to handle any kind come from north korea or another state like iran. host: independent line. michele flournoy is our guest at north korea is our topic. caller: thank you for taking my call, c-span. michele flournoy, i had a question about a call that came in earlier. people were calling in with their opinions. hisman spoke about , someion in 1993 or 1994 sort of agreement the u.s. had with north korea to cut back on andr nuclear deliberation a two goodies. we were supposed to provide them .ith oil -- and activities we were supposed to provide them with oil and food, i do not know, tv.

and this woman that called in ered that the united states w negged on what we were offering. that theyour fault were pursuant. what is the trick to that? guest: i do not think that is accurate. we have had several rounds of a six party talks that includes north korea and south korea and the united states and russia and china and so forth. there have been several point where we reach various which trade some kind of assistance from the west. there are steps for north korea to come back into compliance with the nuclear obligations under the treaty. every time the north koreans

have failed to hold up their part of the bargain, my reading of history is that each time this has occurred at some point along the way, they have gotten off the path that we have agreed and started the cycle of provocation. i'm not familiar with any theode for which it was united states that reneged on a deal. host: from the washington times, i want to get your reaction to this editorial. shoot" is the name of the article. the white house can put aside global warming hysteria. president obama has been making sleepy time choices. not long after assuming office, he shelved the bush administration's plans to boost the number of grant-based midcourse defense interceptors.

concluding that the north korean threats were exaggerated. only now has obama administration had been jolted awake to confront the reality that mr. bush was right. guest: having been a part of that decision early in the obama administration, that we signed the intelligence at the time was that the north koreans had expand a number of setbacks in their program. the program was not moving at the same pace. to we were really trying reprioritize our missile program minutere -- to the more threats coming from iran in the middle east and elsewhere and medium-range threats and so forth. tot you saw is not an end missile defense. we had a program that had more than 30 interceptors that were ready.

it was more than enough to handle any rogue threat from north korea or iran should the program accelerate faster than we anticipated. will they were building up the missile defense systems, which were much more imminent threat and still are, we were never left defenseless. we have always had that national missile defense system that was sufficient to the threat. now that you see additional resources and some progress in the missile system, they have gotten a missile to launch a satellite into orbit, which is one of the steps on the program. i think it is only appropriate that we now say, ok. they have made some progress. our steps are going to be ahead of their full realization of the capability. the defense of this country in

terms of national missile defense is complete. host: a few minutes left with our guest, michele flournoy. missouri. democrat. you are on "washington journal." wanda? caller: yes, hello. first of all, a couple of questions. and a statement. i have a son in guam. several children over there. he is in the air force. options do they have for americans leaving the area? host: go ahead and ask your other question. caller: ok. the second question is -- it is not a question of whether king is unstable.

it is more about what he is going to and where he's good to do it. -- ofre the options whether he is going to do it. one bombhat there is that could hit the west coast. there are conflicting stories. thee is one that could hit west coast of the united states. and there are others who say they do not have the capability. host: have you talk to your son in guam? are there any precautions being taken that he has discussed? like i said, he is in the air force. kind of what they do is secret. he is unable to tell us exactly what they are doing. i have not spoken to him personally. i sent him an e-mail for his

birthday a couple of weeks ago. i haven't spoke to him except through an e-mail. host: thank you. guest: i appreciate your concerns as a mom. nothe nuclear capability, one believes that north korea currently has a missile that can deliver a nuclear weapon to the continental united states. they have some crew devices -- crude devices, but nothing that could reach the united states today. let's be clear on that. the defensehat department and the president are taking the threat seriously. they have moved additional assets into the region, including to protect guam. if they saw additional mobilization of resources and

readiness on the north korean side, i think you might see corresponding actions on the part of the united states. it would most likely include that wasn of any area one or both to north korean missiles. again, i do not think anyone is reading the crisis of having reached that point. tensionslly when ratchet up to a certain point, you see tenants being moved out of harms way if people are worried about that threat. our lasthele flournoy, guest predicted we would see an action, reaction, another action, another reaction. the you foresee north korea being aggressive? think i do not inc. -- -- iwill do anything to

think were trying to tamp down the tension. if north korea were to miscalculate and launch provocation and killed south koreans or americans, you would certainly see a response. there has been a series of 'sovocations by kim jong-u un father. there has been provocation planning with the south and anticipating all kinds of scenarios with what the south would do. what kind of alliance would follow? they have got through a lot of different scenarios. they have options ready for the two presidents to consider - should that occur. everyone on the west side is trying to ensure we do not go down that path if that all possible. host: michele flournoy has been our guest on "washington journal" former secretary of

defense for policy. we appreciate your time. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> on the next "washington onrnal" russell moore religion and politics. vanden heuvel on progressives and issues. and a discussion on the growing obesity. is liveton journal" every day at 7 a.m. eastern. >> coming up, a look at some of the healthcare needs needs and challenges facing returning u.s. military servicemembers and veterans. we'll hear from linda schwartz next.