but just coming out with a compliance regimen without a real collaboration and corporation -- the notion the private sector does not understand this risk, we operate globally. we operate with the internet and cyber systems been critical to our model. we are attacked every day. we have an understanding of the impact of this. the question is, how do we work with governments here and around the world to protect what is on criminalork and accidents that network occurring around the world that impact us as well as national security in regions around the world? --i would like to invoke invite the folks at lunch today

if you have comments or questions. i think you have concerns that deserve to be represented. dan? >> i am with caterpillar. this is a tactical question. one of the things we have seen is in major vulnerability caused by a poorly written code that underlies our applications, operating systems, telecommunications devices. we have talked about designing but having code is stable and secure is not happening. you talked about silicon valley. you talked about route 128. the same problems are inherent in all of the companies and locations. they write bad code. this is something that cannot be done purely in the private- sector or in the government sector. has anyone given that a sock?

how can we change the vulnerability landscape we exist in? >> worse yet, some of the code is not been written in silicon valley. it is being written on the other side of the world. sometimes the problems are delivering our -- deleverage rather than accidental. there's a push to get code out quickly and to update. for a long time in this domain, the pressure was to get new things out more quickly. the security element was not a major feature. the customer has a lot of say in this. the customer starts to the current this and wants validation for the software and hardware. that becomes supply chain security. that is the home of a chapter of what we need to talk about. >> the acquisition rules are key. not just government acquisition but also corporate. the gaming industry 10 years ago was like everybody in a

garage. now is three very large players who pushout products for lots of people. that means there is a lot more leverage in the market to say before you give me this product, i wanted to have due diligence with regard to coach. i think not enough has been done about that conversation clearly. we have to look for where there are leverage points. there also is this sense of cultural change that is going to be challenging in this information age. there is risk out here that we have to take responsibility for as opposed to purely leasing it from government of activity. >> i am a journalist. to tiemy interests is these discussions to current events and news. secretary napolitano pointed out the solutions we are talking about, the approaches we are talking about in this area are going to require a level of intimacy between the public and

private sector. i am curious if you have any thoughts about whether these recent revelations about collaboration between the nsa and tech companies have jeopardized 14 to the notion of -- or tinted the notion of collaboration. >> what we're talking about is completely different from the other program. publicnce shows in the discussions allot of stuff gets inflated. that being said, there is a risk that for some people, particularly when there has not been a bad event, they can get themselves worked up by speculating how all this will wind up with some big brother type of thing. there are structural changes in our society with data in the private sector that will not be

rolled back. we are largely dependent on networks for moving information and making things happen. anybody who thinks it is better to let things develop so that the criminals and terrorists can exploit it will be in for a rude awakening. i do think we need to be honest about it. we need to be clear. the media to spend time explaining with clarity what is being proposed as opposed to simply taking one spin anded person's putting it out as if it is the gospel. >> i agree completely. i think it colors the dialogue where discussion. i think there has to be a public discussion about these issues for people to understand it. in many cases, these are very complicated issues people have not thought about in terms of their cyber presence and how that is potentially exploitable. we hear about identity theft.

the more sinister aspects of this are not very clear to the public. the revelations of the last couple of weeks has made it difficult. was one telecom that said the government asked for 5000 requests in the last month. you read between the lines. you do not do in law enforcement investigation in this company without getting the cell phone records. how lawl a part of enforcement gets to the facts. that was all kind of in this big push about government involvement in the private sector. efficientlyhat more in terms of what it really means and how this part of infrastructure protection is different from the intelligence collection and those sorts of things will go a long way toward the american public better understanding how this must work. >> i think it reflects a

transition to our government is that thisugh conversation has helped to highlight. we took the position after 9/11 that security and dealing with the terrorism threat was largely government to. the job of the citizens was to shop and travel. we're going to put this on steroids and make the threat go away. we realize the threat has not gone away. the only way we get after this threat is to engage private sector and broader civil society. our cold war apparatus is still ticking away that this is inherently governmental and a closed system. there are some things that have to be closed. the government is starting to realize it needs to err on the side of more openness about what it is doing. the president is saying we will push out more with the systems are. the days we can work behind closed doors and take care of problems are gone.

situation helps us make that cultural shift that much quicker, i think it will be a positive outcome instead of a - 1. >> we have covered a lot of territory. i want to give each of you an opportunity if there is some point you have left unmade or some, if you want to throw out as a parting thought. >> >> i want to thank the woodrow wilson center for highlighting this. i think we are at a time when people are focused on this. i think it is a bit of a novelty to talk about the private sector having responsibility and accountability at the critical infrastructure level. we need to continue this discussion. i would say let's not continue indefinitely. action has to follow or we are going to be in an unhappy place. >> i would echo his comments. the private sector does understand this risk. reputationk to our

and our customers. we worry about that every day. it is not that we're sitting with our heads in the sand thinking the government is going to tell us what to do. ,his is real work we are doing the integration of that within the critical infrastructure of this country and others who are asking the same questions will be the real challenge. that is where the partnership has to be. that is where the dialogue has to be. yearseminded, i spent 30 in the air force. 20 years ago, the military was having this very discussion about who is in charge and who is going to be accountable. we solved that india the some years ago. --see us -- we saw that solved that in dod some years ago. i see that in these discussions about shared responsibility and the processes we are going to

use to do that. >> it is a fascinating moment. talking about the challenge of a panel like the say we are representing sectors. but i am delighted to have this chance to be part of the conversation. i would argue academia needs to be part of this as well. the manhattan project was taking a bunch of people who were very smart and knew nothing about national security and harvesting that expertise to deal with the threat. we have that. it is the greatest strength in this country. they are knocking on the door to come here. we have left academia largely on the sidelines of this conversation. it is public-private and academic as well. jane, thank you so much. this has been a useful and interesting discussion.

i would like to thank the woodrow wilson center and in p.r. for sponsoring this. npr for sponsoring this. [applause] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] whiteive picture from the house briefing room, waiting for today's briefing with white house press secretary jay carney. and number of items he could be asked about our reporters today,

the supreme court decision on appointments released earlier today. the court deciding to review a federal court ruling that found the president did violate the constitution when he bypassed the senate last year to appoint three members of the national labor relations board. the cause of the questions about immigration legislation. the president will be talking about that with business leaders this afternoon. the senate has a key vote on immigration coming up at 5:30 today. you will be able to watch the senate live on c-span2. we could your questions on edward snowden. today, a petition tallied 100,000 signatures calling for his part in in. a number of items that could come up today. we will have the briefing when it gets started here on c-span.

>> again, waiting for the start of the white house briefing. we got the two minute warning about two minutes ago. it could start any moment. i want to tell you about some programming coming up. , there is an american

enterprise hosted the event on student financial aid. it is a daylong conference on financial aid. it will take place until 5:00 this afternoon. you can see live coverage on c- span3. this afternoon, a discussion on u.s.-mexico cooperation with the mexican ambassador to the u.s. and assistant homeland security secretary who used to be the head of u.s. customs and border protection agency. that will be live on this network beginning at 3:30 eastern.

[laughter] this televised? [laughter] nobody told me. thank you for being here. it is always good to have you on a slow news day. before i take questions, i wanted to note that this week represents an important step in our efforts to start delivering on the promise of expanding access to quality, affordable

health coverage for millions of americans. we're launching the new and whiched health care.gov will be the marketplace's online home starting in october. ,or spanish-speaking customers the website has been updated in preparation for the marketplace. the screen behind me give you a sense of the new website. we're opening a consumer call center that will be open 24 hours a day, seven days a week. this toll-free service will help answer questions. starting in october, it will provide personalized assistance for callers filling out the application or selecting a plan. beginning october 1, a new health insurance marketplace will open in every state giving americans a new way to shop for health insurance. teamhe next 100 days, the at hhs will be working to educate the public about in a moment. for the first time in the history of the private insurance market, consumers will be able to go to one place to check out

our coverage options, and get accurate information and make comparisons of plans before they make the decision. i do recommend you visit the site. it is well-designed and user- friendly and represents the efforts underway to help inform the american people about the options available to them under health care reform and the affordable care act. julie? >> what the can you tell us about edward snowden's whereabouts? is the white house working under the assumption he is still in russia? >> we understand he departed hong kong yesterday and arrived in russia. beyond that, i would refer you to russian authorities. >> you cannot tell us whether you are working under that assumption? >> it is our assumption he is in russia. happening between the

u.s. and russia? there was a report that you were asking the russians took options to expel him. do they say they are working towards that goal? >> we are in conversations. we are working with them were expecting with them or in them to look at the options available to expel him back to the united states to face justice for the crimes with which he is charged. -- intensifyense cooperation with russia after the boston marathon bombings and our history of working with russia on law enforcement matters, including returning numerous high-level criminals back to russia at the request of the russian government, but we do expect the russian government to look options available to them to expel mr. snowden back to the united states. >> have they responded by saying yes we are?

>> i do not have detailed conversations to read to you. we are monitoring the situation closely. we are in contact with russia and other governments as appropriate. >> snowden left hong kong. what type of influence do you think beijing had in that decision? >> first of all, let me say the , complied withe theof the points in agreement. at no point did the authorities in hong kong raise any issues regarding these efficiencies of the u.s. arrest request. in light of this, we find their decision to be troubling. since june 10 when we learned mr. snowden was in hong kong, u.s. authorities have been in contact with their hong kong counterparts at the working and senior levels. attorney general eric holder placed a phone call on june 19

with his counterpart in hong kong stressing the importance of the matter and urging hong kong to honor our request for his arrest. there have been repeated engagements by the u.s. department of state and consulate general in hong kong. there have been repeated engagements by the fbi with their law enforcement counterparts. there have been continual communications by the doj office of international affairs with counterparts at the hong kong department of justice international law department. on june 17, hong kong authorities acknowledge receipt of our request. despite repeated inquiries, who did not respond with additional information saying only it was under review and refusing to elaborate. hong kong authorities requested additional evidence. the u.s. had been in communication with hong kong about the increase in were in the process of responding to the request when we learned hong kong authorities allowed the

fugitive to link -- to leave hong kong. we are not buying this was a technical decision but hong kong immigration official. this was a deliberate choice by the government to release the fugitive despite a valid arrest warrant. that decision and unquestionably has a negative impact on u.s.- china relationship. >> what are the repercussions in the relationship? >> i will not speculate, but the chinese have criticized the importance of building mutual trust. we think they have felt that effort is serious setback. if we cannot count on them to honor their legal extradition obligations, there is a problem. that is the point we're making to them directly. no presidential communications to report. obviously, we are communicating with our counterparts at the appropriate levels. >> are there repercussions for u.s. and u.s.-russia relations? >> i would not want to speculate on outcomes.

mr.ou know, we understand snowden to be in russia. we are in discussions with russian authorities abbottabad -- about that. we have a strong law enforcement cooperative relationship with the russians. in usas resulted returning criminals to russia. we are expecting the russians to examine the options available to them to expel mr. snowden for his return to the united states. >> frustrating is it to the president that china and let him go and now china seems to be on the verge of letting him go? >> i would not want to speculate on anything that has not happened yet. i will say our frustration and disappointment with hong kong and china is reflected in the statement i just made. >> how did the president react when he learned snowden had left hong kong?

>> i would say the president has been updated by his national security staff on developments. i do not have a characterization of his reaction to developments except to say that he is monitoring it closely and the disappointment we feel in the handling of this by hong kong authorities and the chinese is evident by what i just said. >> do you want answers on why his passport was not pulled sooner? >> let me say a couple of things about that. the state department explained this yesterday. as a routine matter and consistent with u.s. regulations, persons with felony arrest warrants are subject to having their passport revoked. such a revocation does not affect citizenship status. persons wanted on felony charges such as mr. snowden should not be allowed to proceed in any further international travel and other than necessary to return them to the united states. weause of the privacy act,

cannot comment on mr. snowden's passport specifically. i can say the hong kong authorities were advised of the status of his travel documents in plenty of time to have prohibited travel as appropriate. let me repeat. i can say the hong kong authorities were advised of the status of mr. snowden's travel documents in plenty of time to have prohibited his travel as appropriate. i think i did reflect our concern and disappointment in the actions or failure to act by hong kong authorities as well as the fact we do not by the suggestion china cannot have taken action. >> the president made a call to president putin. if he has not, why not? >> i do not have presidential communications to read.

there is no reason given international law and the relationships with the countries in question that this would require a communication from the president. i am not reading out presidential communications. there are communications at all appropriate levels. a strong cooperative relationship with the russians on law enforcement matters. we expect the russians to examine the options available to them to expel mr. snowden for his return to the united states. as i just said, when it comes to our relations with hong kong and china, we see this as a setback in terms of their efforts to build mutual trust. our concerns are clearly stated. yes. >> does the administration feel mr. snowden has revealed everything he had to reveal? he said he had access to the full roster of the nsa. do you believe he has access to

that kind of information? >> there is a damage assessment being undertaken. i do not have specifics on the progress of that assessment for you. on thatwould have more for you. i can say we are concerned caused byleak information. we are concerned about the kind of information that has been leaked. i think that is reflected in the action taken by the department of justice. we have said all along the disclosure of this kind of highly classified material is extremely damaging to our national security and gives our terrorist enemies a playbook for our activities designed to thwart them. the implications of this kind of an authorized release of information are profound. yes. >> a russian news agency has speculated one reason for the

delay in his departure may be that there are concerns the u.s. might try to force down a russian airliner to land on u.s. territory to retrieve snowden. with force after him like that? >> we are communicating with appropriate authorities in russia and elsewhere on this matter. i am not going to respond to speculation in a russian newspaper. it has been a long time since i have done that. >> would we down an airliner from another country? >> we expect the russian authorities to examine all options available to them to expel mr. snowden appropriately. i think i can leave it at that. >> do you rule out any use of force? >> i will not engage in speculation about options. i will say we're working with

authorities in a variety of countries on this matter. >> is there any information on what has happened to the four computers he is supposed to have been carrying? >> i do not have any information. said, we remain concerned about the unauthorized leak of classified information and potential for leaks of more classified information. there is a damage assessment on going. i think it is safe to assume information he has provided and they still have is already compromised and the damage assessment would have to take that into account. >> there are stories out there. one story has the computers being left behind at one point. another store has the chinese having had a chance to copy the information. what do we know? >> i do not have specifics. maybe the department of justice

does. it is safe to assume in the damage assessment that is ongoing that any information he might have that is unauthorized that he has not already provided publicly, we would expect to be compromised. the president is disappointed in china's handling. what about the u.s. handling? what is leading the efforts? is it the white house, the justice department? >> there are a variety of people involved on issues like this. the state department at the diplomatic level. the department of justice of law-enforcement level. the white house has a coordinator -- down.track him >> department of justice has issued an indictment and has a lead in that matter. there are other agencies involved in the effort to deal with the situation.

that involves diplomacy as well as law enforcement. to your question about the u.s. handling of it, i think i addressed the issue of the passport. again, without being able to be specific about an individual's passport because of the privacy act, i was able to say what i said about the fact hong kong authorities were advised of the status of his travel documents in time to have prohibited his travel as appropriate. there was no indication in any conversations between u.s. officials and hong kong officials prior to their request for information that preceded the departure of mr. snowden that there were any problems. >> there have been suggestions and reports that interpol has not which was not contacted early enough in the process to alert them to the fact that the u.s. wanted their help. is that true? when where they contacted?

>> on matters of interpol read notices, it is most valuable when you where be reduced when the whereabouts of a fugitive are unknown. we knew he was in hong kong and sought his arrest pending extradition while the charges were under seal. it is unfortunate hong kong failed to take action on our request and permitted a fugitive to leave their country in an obvious attempt to escape justice. >> the administration was to have aembarrassed contractor leaked documents in the first place. is theegistration -- administration embarrassed that you cannot track him down? >> i have been clear about the and ourwe have taken assessment of the failure of authorities in hong kong to act appropriately on a provisional arrest. we have known where he is.

we believe we know where he is now. there are ongoing conversations about that. beyond that, we will have to assess as time passes. >> near more than six hours removed from the supposedly airplane he was supposedly going to be on on the way to havana. is he not on airplane yet? the government is making progress? is that a positive sign as far as the u.s. government is concerned? that he has not gone on an airplane. situation an ongoing as you describe it. we have announced the russians to look at the options available to them to expel mr. snowden back to the united states. workedote that we have cooperatively with the russians in the wake of the boston marathon bombings and have a fairly substantial history of

law enforcement corporation with -- cooperation with russia as a backdrop to this discussion. i would not want to characterize communications at this point. i would not want to speculate about outcomes. this is clearly fluid. we're monitoring. >> so far, they are cooperating? understanding mr. snowden remains in russia. beyond that, i would not want to speculate about next steps except that we have communicated to the russians our hope that they will look all options available to them to expel mr. snowden back to the united states. >> does the u.s. government believe if he is allowed to governmenta the u.s. will give up on getting him back? >> i would not want to speculate about that. i do not think of a is a way to characterize the situation. we understand where

he is and having appropriate conversations about that. i would not want to get ahead of that. >> on immigration, one of the he does notats said believe it is a blow to immigration reform is a version does not house the house before the august recess. it does not pass the house before the august recess. are you comfortable with the idea that it does not act you can still get immigration reform? >> we want progress in both houses. we have seen substantial progress in the senate. agreementr the reached on border security to be a positive breakthrough in the bipartisan effort toward common- sense immigration reform, comprehensive immigration reform in the senate.

this process is continuing. we look forward to action by the senate. we continue to work with the house as they take up the issue. question is a good one because it reflects that there are obstacles that remain before we get to where we want to be. which is to a place where we have bipartisan legislation passed by both houses of congress that meets the standard set by the president, the principles he laid out, so he can sign it into law. this was always going to be a heavy lift. we are encouraged by the progress we have seen. we recognize we are not there yet. a lot of work remains to be done. in the house certainly, in the senate as well. i do not want to draw any lines in the sand about what we're hoping or expecting to see out of the house. we want to continue to see

progress. there is the kind of progress in the senate that reflects a broader consensus in the country. assessments that have been made about the bill in question reflect the broad benefits immigration reform will provide to the country, to the middle class, to businesses, to economic growth, to reducing our deficit. benefits plenty of here. there was an assessment about the benefits of legal immigration reform and the benefits that would have on innovation and entrepreneurship in this country. immigrants are disproportionately responsible for business start-ups.

that helped to drive the economy and increase growth and job creation. this legislation and issue is much bigger with far broader benefits than i think is sometimes recognized. yes, sir. >> can you talk about the government's assessment of president mandela's condition and what the thinking is of how that might be handled going the president's trip? i can say weint, are monitoring the situation and therstand from the reports former south african president nelson mandela is in critical condition. our thoughts and prayers are with him, his family, and the people of south africa. i would not want to speculate about the impact of his help on the president's trip.

he continues to look forward to his visit to south africa and to continuing to build on our strong partnership with the south african government and people. the president obviously has long seen nelson mandela as one of his personal heroes. i think he is not alone in that in this country or around the world. we all express our thoughts and are with the family at this time. if held you anticipate were to pass before the president left the visit would be changed in tone but still take place? >> it is hard to say. it would not be appropriate to speculate on that right now. we're all wishing for his recovery.

yes. >> back to the snow the situation. can you detail the president's personal involvement over the last few days? how often is he being briefed? is he personally monitoring things? is this operating below him at the justice department? >> i do not have presidential communications to read. i can say the president has been regularly briefed by his senior staff on the situation by all of the appropriate officials. with regards to one of the earlier questions, this is a circumstance where all the appropriate steps were taken. all of the appropriate conditions were made with hong kong authorities. as has been detailed by the state department, we see no foron or no justification the failure to provisionally kongt mr. snowden in hong by hong kong authorities in

accordance with our negotiated agreement. this process continues. we are in conversations with other governments about the situation. yes. climate andion of the president's speech tomorrow. does the president feel the epa has the ability to carry out the regulations he will outline tomorrow? gene mccarthy is uniquely qualified. she has decades of experience serving democrats and republicans. she has a long track record of working with industry and business leaders to find common sense solution. the senate should confirm her without a way. as you saw over the weekend, we announced the president will speak tomorrow at georgetown university on the growing threat of climate change and the need to reduce carbon pollution and

that we need to do that for the sake of our children and future generations. he will lay out his vision for where he believes we need to go. i will not get into specifics about what he will announce. he will present a national plan to reduce carbon pollution, to prepare our country for the impact of climate change and lead global efforts to fight it. this is a serious challenge but one that we are uniquely qualified in the united states to deal with. our way, it plays to strength. we should be leaders in this effort. >> if the epa does not have a confirmed head -- >> we would not accept the premise. gina mccarthy is uniquely qualified to lead the eepa. we believe should be concerned. there is no reason for her not to be. she is qualified for the post. we will continue to work with the senate to see her confirmation through.

>> i have one other question. do you have any reaction to the supreme court ruling on afirmative action and take confirmation next fall? >> those are two separate issues. on the recess appointments, we're confident the president's authority will be upheld by the courts. posted a blog item and can recirculate that. the issue is about the president having the authority of his predecessors have had to make these recess appointments. beyond that in terms of our legal argument, i will point to the blog post. affirmative action, this is an ongoing case. that was the decision made by the court today. i do not have further comment. you have seen what we have said about it. you have seen a brief filed. the brief weeen

have filed in the case. i have no further comment on the decision by the supreme court to send it back to the lower courts today. >> you mentioned the talks that are going on regarding mr. snowden. can you describe what kind of level they are up? >> not more than i have, the appropriate levels. i think i made the point this is the kind of thing based on the cooperation we've had in the past, that we can discuss at the withpriate levels counterparts in other governments. we are doing that with russia and other countries. >> how is there been any communication between the administration and ecuador? i cannot quite recall if we have anything on that.

we have anything on ecuador. the answer to that is the united states has been in touch via diplomatic and law enforcement channels with countries through which mr. smith might transit or could serve as final destinations. i do not have more details on the conversations except that they have been held through the appropriate diplomatic and law enforcement channels. the u.s. is advising these governments that mr. snowden is wanted on felony charges and should not be allowed to proceed in any further international travel other than necessary to return him to the united states. story the other day about the insider threat program the administration has that goes beyond national security leaks. co-workersth monitoring other co-workers, the

fact that agencies are telling employees that divorce and financial problems could lead to leaks and equates leaking to espionage or treason. i am wondering what the level of support is and how knowledgeable he is about it. >> i confess i did not see the story. ont do you have a comment that? >> i will have to read the story first. then i will know. >> when you say you know where snowden is, how specifically do you know where he is? >> de- you mean what room in building? [laughter] c17a basedwas not in on the reporting of your colleagues. i will not get into specifics. it is our understanding he is still in russia. he said he hoped russia would expel him in an appropriate matter -- manner.

what would that look like? our general conversations with the government about the government's with the fact he is subject to felony charges and we would expect him to be prevented from taking further international travel except for travel that would return him to the united states. with the united states sent an airplane to pick him up? >> i think we will have the appropriate discussions with the appropriate officials and governments. the general principle applies regardless of the mode of transport. >> going back to hong kong, do you believe the hong kong government knew exactly where snow was and were able to get their hands on him? what is the united states relationship with ecuador? is there any reaching out to their foreign ministry to prevent snowden from going to a

quarter? >> i just answered the ecuador question by noting we have been in touch via diplomatic and law- enforcement channels with countries for which he might transit or could serve as final destinations. obviously, ecuador has been speculated about as a location. >> how would you describe u.s. relations with ecuador? >> i do not have a characterization of the relationship as regards to this. we would be noting to other governments the fact mr. snowden is wanted on felony charges and should not be allowed to proceed with any further international travel except as necessary to return him to the united states. let the united states know where he was? >> i think he was at the airport. passing through immigration, they probably knew it was mr. snowden, no doubt. we have ongoing conversations with hong kong authorities about mr. stone -- snowden.

the answer would have to be yes to that question. have the chinese broken the trust of this relationship the two countries are trying to make? >> i think is fair to say this is a setback in the effort by the chinese to help develop mutual trust. you know, i think as we have said, with regards to the failure by hong kong to provisionally arrest mr. snowden that we do not by the suggestions of the chinese were not part of this, that this was just a technical issue in hong kong alone. we believe it is a setback. is the relationship between the u.s. and china heading toward some kind of

[indiscernible] thing? >> i think that is getting ahead of things. is it the administration's perspective that country's are doing that to harbor him or access the information they believe he possesses? let me say this about that question. mr. snowden's claimed he has focused on supporting transparency and protection of individual rights and democracy is belied by the protectors he has potentially chosen. china, russia, ecuador. his failure to criticize these regimes suggests his true motive has been to ensure the national security of the united states, not to advance internet freedom and free speech.

i think with regard to the first part of your question, i made unauthorized disclosure of classified has an enormous negative impact. there are ongoing damage assessment being done. certainly it would be our assumption any information, any further classified information he has that has not been divulged publicly would be compromised or has been compromised. >> what about your argument he is a criminal? is he more like a spy? why give him up? >> i made no comment on any activity by any other government. i simply said you have to he has taken without

authorization classified , you have to make is the assumption it will be publicly or compromised in some way. you cannot assume it is protected were safe because he has taken it with him and left the country. beyond that, he has been charged as you know. you have seen the and sealed indictment. indictments. >> based on the president's address, does the president have of gettingor hope climate legislation through in his second term? >> i think his view reflects reality. tohave seen congress attempt deal with this issue and fail to. the president has made clear he will act where he can, with

congress where possible, but where he can on this in a range of issues. hashere is a sign congress the will to take up matters related to reducing carbon and doing other things to positively affect the development of clean energy or reducing the impact of climate change on the american people, then we will obviously be more than happy to engage with congress and will do that. thethe president will take actions he began using his authority to address this challenge. you know what he was able to do in the first term when it came to reducing or increasing carbon emissions standards. it was historic. it will have dramatic impact on the amount of carbon pollution in the air. he was able to do that work in

-- working with automobile manufacturers. it did not require congressional action. do oneing to have to more after you because i have a 1:00. >> the big question is whether epa should regulate existing power plants. can you say whether the president will call on epa to regulate these power plants? >> at the risk of shocking yah hoo, i will not preempt the president. nor will i randomly the bulge classified information. the president will give his speech. about hise learning proposals and actions he proposes taking from that speech. >> i was listening to something before coming over. they implied he is no threat to snowden. is there an implied physical

threat to the physical safety of mr. snowden from the u.s. government? now or in the future? of course not. my real question -- [laughter] you kept referring to how well we cooperated recently. you sort of made a critical remark about the nature of the regimes in some countries. >> i think i was making factual statements in all cases. >> ok. the i look at this, i think u.s. has a history of torture and people like snowden. the recalled dissidents and political prisoners.

they were called dissidents and political prisoners. i look at snow and as a classical political prisoner. why do they not deserve to be supportive for the desire to tell the truth about their own people? >> you feel passionately about this, i can tell. the distinctions are evident if you look at them clearly. when it comes to mr. snowden, he has been indicted for the unauthorized release of classified information. again, i think the point i made passion is for press freedom and freedom of the internet and the like that he has chosen unlikely protectors. again, i will let the case itself -- >> the political dissidents commit crimes all the time,

including terrorist crimes. you probably remember the case where the hijacked the plane and killed. they came to the u.s. and given refuge by the u.s. >> i think there are real distinctions between the legal regimes in place in different countries at different times, the consequences of violating and being charged with laws in different countries at different times. i think you know that as well as i do and know the history as well as i do. snowdenly believe mr. ought to be returned to the united states to face the charges that have been set against 10 through an open and clear legal process we have in this country. thank you all very much. >> has the president talked to the mandela family?

of thisu missed any briefing, it is available on c- span.org. president obama will be meeting with business leaders this afternoon on the issue of immigration, an item the senate continues debate today. it takes place at the white house. we will have remarks from the president if they become available. the president's meeting will happen today at 2:00 eastern. the senate reconvenes at noon. lawmakers are back to work on bipartisan immigration legislation. they have a key vote on the bill set for this afternoon at 5:30 eastern. you can see the senate debate live on c-span2. the house had a brief session. sessions will continue tomorrow. you can see the house live when they return tomorrow on c-span. coming up later today, the

brookings institution will host a discussion on u.s.-mexico relations. among the participants, the mexican ambassador to the u.s. and the assistant homeland security secretary. you can see that live on c-span starting at 3:30 eastern. >> first ladies have the capacity if they choose. this is a pattern in american women and politics. there are two things. one is their women, real people who do things. then there is this secondary capacity of being a personifying figure, a charismatic figure. many a first lady has become a first lady realizing this was larger than life. that was something dolly figure out. she became a figurehead for her husband's administration. if she fostered the attachment to the capital city.

going4, the british are to burn the capital city. all of this work she put into helping the public identify with this house they called the white house under her term is going to pay off because it is going to give the surge of nationalism around the war. >> our focus on first ladies continues every monday night. our next program features the historian and author on why we study first lady's tonight at 9:00 eastern on c-span. >> we always focus on what is important in the business. 191i69 an example of more recent times when the telecom act went into effect. in 1997 we were rolling out digital video. residential telephone social securities, commercial services and bringing bundle to the market. we were the first in the country to start bundling

services together. and for that customers responded very positively and we were able to get into new business that is others didn't even dream ability because we got in there so early and were rewarded for that. >> everybody understands that sports and live sports right now is the sweet spot of media. it is almost the only thing you have to watch live. so that has increased its value. and i think everybody is seing that now whether they be social media site that is are partnering with us to do tweeting about sports or to show sports as we have, show live sports on facebook. other networks, other cable networks. i think everybody understands that sports rights are quite valuable. >> more of what is happening in today's cable industry with leaders of two of the country's largest communications companies. the communicators tonight on c-span2.

>> a discussion now with the government's witness protection program from today's "washington journal." >> we look at your money, how .ederal dollars are spent our guest this morning is gerald shore and he is actually a founder of the witness protection program. thanks so much for being was. we read about the witness protection program or hear about it. what is it in real life? >> in real life it is taking individuals who are in danger because they are cooperating with the federal government or in some cases state government and they will wind-up being killed frankly if they testify. so we needed a mechanism where we could put witnesses on the witness stand and make sure

that they will survive after hey testify. host: was it created, and what was your role in it? -- how was it created? guest: as a young child i used to hear my father talk about organized crime interfering with the business he was in. he worked in the garment is as -- business as a labor negotiator. he used to come on to talk about how it interfered with negotiations. through high school i got interested in organized-crime and began to research it and continue through college. i was fortunate after law school i went into private practice and sell a fellow named bobby kennedy being appointed. i went on to my wife -- home to

my wife and said how would you like to explain to washington? she said you think you can get a job? i said i do not know. she said fly out monday and find out. i got hired. i was assigned to work organized crime in new york city. for the older listeners you might remember the name joe valaci, the first member of the mafia. he first person to tell us who are the members, and the first really cooperating witness in the organized crime. i began to work with him. i began to work with other mobsters in new york. it occurred to me we need a mechanism to protect people if they're glad to testify. my colleagues were assigned elsewhere in the country running into the same xperience.

it occurred to me we need a system where we can take an individual who is willing to cooperate and immediately relocate the person and their family. host: what was done funding to the prior of the wit -- prior to the founding of the witness protection program? what happened to them and their families? guest: what happened was the local police or local agents, r drug enforcement agents, they would almost chip and and move someone from one place to another. what there was not was a system where they could pick up the telephone, call washington, say i have a witness in office and

are willing to testify, what do do with them? we will say we can have that wind is protected as of now. we needed to develop a mechanism where we not only could move the family, but then what do you do with the family after they have moved out of town? hat this program did was establish a mechanism where the prosecutor, agents could make a single phone call and have this whole process begin to ork. guest: talking about the federal witness protection program with the founder of gerald shur. here are the numbers to call if you'd like to share your comments or ask the question --

our guest co-authored the book witsec." he cost of the program in 2012 was $9.7 million. here are details. new identities and documentation. they also get financial assistance for basic living expenses, we will medical assistance and living. how much help do these people get to start their new lives? how much is hands on and at what point are they put on their own? host: it is hands -- guest: it is hands on from the beginning. the moment you agree to testify we would have a witness security inspector who is in the marshals service come to you and explain to you how the program works.

at the same time the federal rosecutor would make the request of my office, office of nforcement operations -- i should say my old office because i am now retired, but they would make a request of my office to say that we have a witness, here is the pace we want them to testify and here is how important their testimony is and how many other witnesses we have been the case. we could make and a valuation as to whether or not the witness is really important. at the same time the deputy marshal explain the program.

at the same time we would have a psychologist to a psychological examination over -- for everyone over the age of 18 to determine whether or not they would be capable, fit in, handle the regulations and commit a crime in the future? are they likely to be violent? all of that would come back in the psychological report. we would have the evaluation of the headquarters of the federal investigative agency. not only the field office giving a judgment, the office at headquarters, fbi eadquarters. whatever agency is involved in the investigation. they would submit information. my point is, as a considerable amount of data is submitted before the judgment is made to totally disrupt a family and move them from one city to another.

host: gerald shur mentioned he started his career as an attorney in corpus christi, texas. he served as a trial attorney in the racketeering section of credit -- recruited under robert kennedy. and as he mentioned, he is retired. joining us from philadelphia this morning. our first calller on the ndependent line. caller: i was calling in regards to when the witnesses goes into the program for life and it becomes difficult -- i will give an example. 'm howard stern fan. host: what are the rules and requirements for staying in the program? what is the code of conduct? guest: this is a voluntary program. the witness can choose to enter or not enter the program.

the witness can leave the program any time they choose to. they could say i do not want any more to do with you, i am on my own. there are roles that are set down. the witness can choose if they beat to it -- the witness can choose to leave at any point in time. they must look for a job. we will help them look for a job. they must stay out of trouble. they must not communicate with people back home, which can be very difficult when you tell a teenager who is in love that they cannot communicate with their boyfriend or girlfriend back home. there are certain set of rules they must follow. if they find that too difficult, they can drop out at any point they want. at that time any financial assistance we give them will stop. i mention the financial ssistance.

that is based on a formula depending on a number of people in the family in this city in which the people are located. so a person living in corpus christi may get less money than a family living in new york city if we relocated them there because of the differences in the cost of living. this is not a reward program and should not be confused with that. only enough money to get by on until we're able to find employment for the witness. host: anthony, a democratic calller from new york. caller: my question is into degrees. one would be you seem to be an expert in organized crime in new york. have you not noticed -- just since the kennedy era there seems to be an infiltration of organized crime, or the money

and influence in government. i was wondering if you could step but said the box and comment on that. also, with this new wikileaks, mr. snowden, aren't they basically whistleblowers? they seem to be bringing forward violations of the onstitution. i think young men are trying to rise to the challenge of pointing out to the american people that we're being led down the path of -- host: you are going little bit off topic. guest: i can, with this respect. i do not think -- there are about 2.5 million federal employees. i do not think the government's secrets should be dependent on

each individual employee deciding on their own whether or not they should provide a secret to the rest of the world. for example, if a person went to decide we will give a new ame and address of every relocated witness in print that in the newspaper, that would be highly dangerous and lead to the deaths of witnesses and heir family. so i draw the line at individuals on their own deciding to go public with information that is classified. i do not think we want several employee deciding that. -- we want every employee deciding that. host: a woman in her 30's named jackie taylor shared her story of being a child and put into the witness protection program because her father was in hell's angels and turned witness. as she shares her childhood

experience in talks about the challenges she faced, we have questions on twitter. radical dallas writes how young -- how old was begun this person to be put in rotection? guest: we are now dealing with grandchildren in the program. the program goes back 1970 or a couple of years before that. there was an official act of 1970 that started the organized-crime program fficially. we are dealing now with hildren and grandchildren. those children are affected to the extent that they may have to supply background information for employment or security clearance. they can call upon the federal government on the witness security marshals to give them assistance in any obstacle they

may encounter. host: they could go forward with their lives with that documentation? guest: yes, they would have omplete documentation. we ran an undercover wedding early on in the program. eyewitnesses child wanted to get married. the witness insisted on having a wedding and insisted on inviting friends from the old neighborhood, precisely the people that might want to kill them to the wedding. we went ahead and told him he would -- that would be all right as long as it was done under our conditions. he arranged for a hotel and eremony. all the guests were invited to a hotel.

when they got to the hotel they found out they were at the wrong place where we had buses and united states marshals put on buses. we were driven to the wedding where it really occurred and riven back to the hotel. they never knew the new name of the person and never knew where the wedding was going to take place. that way we kept them secure. i should point out early on before week -- before we forget, a good portion of the program involves prisoner witnesses. today over the past several years more people entering the program are prisoners who have agreed to cooperate. there are certain prisons around the country, and they serve their term, could be five years, 10 years, and when they are ready to be released, there

is consideration given a good to whether or not they are still in danger and then they would be relocated like any other witness. host: gerald shur was quoted in a story from cnn saying he works with someone about to receive witness protection eligibility. when you ask them their favorite place in the united states and they say hawaii, that is where you do not send hem. were they ever going to exotic destinations they always wanted to visit? guest: most people entering the program are very apprehensive and should be apprehensive. i asked the marshals service who worked with the witness is very early on to tell them this will be an extremely difficult process.

just transferring from one city to another, those are difficult processes for people to go through. not being able to see grand not anymore. not being able to attend a funeral of a relative or visit someone in the hospital. those are extremely we lay that out ahead of time. and what they also know is they will survive. the marshals service has not lost a single witness in the almost 40 years or so that this rogram has been operating. so they will survive. we tell them after a year or so they will adjust. occasionally there are problems along the way like a child wanted a car and told the parents that if you do not give me the car, i will go out and

tell everyone who you really are. we addressed that problem by having a dental check between the witness security officer and a child. but there are difficulties just in a normal transfer in a normal life and you compounded with the fact that you have to be looking over your shoulder for several months until do are comfortable with the fact that no one is koin to find me. that is the object, getting to go -- getting the witness to the point where they do not ook over their shoulder. host: david is our next calller. independent falls church, virginia. aller: good morning. as a government to reach a government attorney, i was involved in the program back in 1970's. one of the problems we encountered is he and his wife

and daughter were issued said security cards in sequence with the numbers were in sequence, which created a security problem for them. i was wondering if that issue has been resolved since hen. guest: i happen to be familiar with the case. i think we have slightly different facts about it. it was not a mother and father. they were in laws being relocated, and we were told by the sun and all but the in-laws would never be working. it was the very first case we had where we obtained social security cards and we had help of another agency to secure o-so security cards. since the in-laws were not born to be working, he secured

consecutive numbers thinking it would never be a problem with it. ultimately the sun and lot put it in false names on of business he was running and used their social security numbers and cause them to be disclosed. that is a non issue and has never come up again. host: gerald shur co-author of "witsec." our guest is the founder of the witness protection program. we're looking at the federal program and how it is funded and what it does. next calller. caller: good morning. this is my first time hearing about you. i am a retired investigator in louisiana. i was part of the witness protection in louisiana.

we did this under the local district attorney's office. i find that they have a lot of flaws with the witness program. they had a lot of troubles with victims and witnesses because they would promise them certain things to get the case solved. i found they were wasting a lot of money. how do you control the spending as far as getting the witness to court? guest: every witness that enters the program was signed a memorandum of understanding. it is a document that lays out everything the federal government will do and will not o for you.

the witness knows ahead of time how much money they will receive for a time of up to six onths. they know what kind of assistance they will receive it so long as they are willing to make efforts to find a job and cooperate with the service and ultimately testified. we do not have many programs in the federal system now and have not had for many years. the first year or two a lot of things were new. for example, one of the very first witnesses we were taking into the program, i mean the first five witnesses. we were sitting in my office and i said to the deputies, we ought to take into an area where we can show him -- where we can show him a house. we should show him a house and show him what it looks

like. then when he is transferred elsewhere and someone says where you from, i can say annapolis, maryland. worded to shop? >> that is the set up. the with this is driven -- the marshall says where should we take him? drive him past my house. i give them my address. we say to the witness and wife, this is where you're going to live. red brick house, colonial. the white says what, live in a house like that? never. sometimes the witnesses are a little difficult to deal with. i mention that to my wife and she said maybe we should consider moving. the witnesses did move.

they lived elsewhere. they did live happily ever after. host: the last calller talked about witnesses entering the program. how are victims dealt with compared to people who enter the program who are themselves criminals? >> we have very few innocent people entering the program. well over 95 percent are people who have been involved crime. either have committed a crime or knowingly dealt with criminals, like bribing someone. i would say probably 2-3% of the 8000-9000 people have entered the program are truly innocent people. for them it is even more difficult than it is for the other witnesses who are gaining some benefits and that they have been involved with crime.

maybe they have gone to jail and are being released afterwards. maybe they have gone probation and are being rowboat -- and are being relocated. for the innocent person it is extremely difficult. on the other side, what happens if we do not relocate them? they cannot testify. you get to a horrible choice of having to ask someone to testify, take a murderer or murderers off the street and the sacrifice of having to move to another community. host: roy the next calller from louisiana in morgan city. caller: i have a question. my question is do people get relocated to countries are outside of the and i did states? guest: we tried that on one or two locations. -- one or two locations. i did not like relocating people outside of the united

states. for one thing, if they needed assistance, who were they going to call? obviously they will speak out. so as tended not to relocate people or want people relocated of said the united states. one or two occasions it was done and it was successful. not something we would ordinarily do. host: independent line. go ahead. caller: what a fascinating subject. thank you very much, c-span. aren't you it a great deal of personal danger by disclosing this information?

guest: i could -- if i could find an effective design to discuss this week i am wearing, i would use it. i am not in danger because the number of years that have gone by, i do not know where anybody is hidden. there is no information i can supply to anyone. there was a time when we were in danger, and in fact, my wife, there was a plan to could not my wife at one time. my wife is a school teacher. a colombian narcotics gang intended to kidnapper or e. so that i would supply information about where a particular week -- a particular witness was relocated. as i indicated, i never knew where witnesses were relocated. that was by design so i could never give up the

information. i was in my office and received a telephone call one day. there is a table full of agents from different federal gencies. there was a plot and indicated that was his purpose. my wife was teaching. i immediately called the school and called the principal's office, got my wife on the phone and said to hurt someone will come out to see you shortly, go along with what they say. talk to you later. that was the conversation, and she understood. a few moments later a deputy u.s. marshal, a young lady she appeared to be, recent college

graduate, showed up of the school. went to my wife's classroom and from there they went to the principle and the deputy explain to the principle the situation and said they believed there was no danger whatsoever and the school. the danger was going to and from the school and therefore the deputy with like to state my -- stay with my wife and the school while class is were on. -- while the classes were on. my wife refused to leave. she said she owed to much to he children. the marshals service agreed to have this young person served as her students assistant and a tie. he principle put out the story that the woman helping was a graduate who decided whether or not she wanted to go into teaching.

so only the principal knew the true story. what nobody realized it she always wore a long jacket because she was covering her gun. my wife recalls a phone call that she received on her cellphone in which my wife hears her say to the boss, i cannot copyright now, i am busy grading papers. i will give back to you. we were in a witness protection program ourselves for a time. i continue to work. deputy marshals would follow me part of the way, call me on my cell phone and tell me i was not being followed and then proceed to my home. we temporarily moved to a hotel outside of the place we were living so could not be found there. that went on for two onths. -- there were occasional dangers.

my teenage daughter picked up the phone and she was asked the question, have you ever thought about death? we recognize who the person was and i had a chat with him the next day in my office. the chap was very simple. i said you have now become my daughter's insurer and you should feel very comfortable when she gets home safely, because if she falls down and gets hurt on the way, you are the one i will hold responsible. host: this was someone in the program? guest: this was someone in the program. host: our guest is gerald shur if you would like to ask our guest questions, republicans -- arizona. gerry, a democrat. o ahead.

caller: i have had experiences twice where they went off the witness program, and both of them ended up dead. mainly because they had trouble handling their new locations. at one time i'd think it was trying to be a little too brave. one had to do with -- both of them were drug smuggling. they actually tried to kidnap my aunt to keep him quiet. e finally came back. within a month he was dead. that was all there was to it. the other one was a name you might be familiar with, i used

to fly a whole lot, and here in -- here in arizona i met a man by the name of various seals. -- barry seals. i will get off the phone and let you answer that one. you should be familiar with t. guest: i do not speak to specific cases, but i can tell you this, all witnesses are offered secularist -- if psychiatric assistance. if we see something that would suggest they should see a psychiatrist, we arrange that. if they wish to on their own, we arrange that also. witnesses are told when they see a psychiatrist that is the one person they may tell their entire truth of the background because we feel that is necessary for them to receive he kind of help they need.

host: a twitter question asking if the clients's debts follow them? guest: all witnesses are expected to pay what debts they owe. we asked them to list out what hey owe. we asked them to make payments on those. they are responsible for the debts they have incurred before relocation. in the event that a creditor wishes to sue the witness, we have our arrangements by statute and by practice in which the creditor can file suit against the hidden witness and actually filed suit against that person and treat them just like any other debtor would be treated.

o we can do that safely. it keeps the witness alive and lets the creditor receive whatever legal rights they would have. host: one more call in pennsylvania. caller: on 9/11, we have learned that there has been a ack of communication and cooperation between state and local -- host: is this having to do with the witness protection program? we're almost out of time. caller: lap of the time? we are out of time. i see. think you. host: the calller touched on coordination. guest: coordination is excellent in the witness rotection program. you were dealing with so many

federal investigative agencies and the coordination is absolutely excellent. that is why there is the success rate of not a single witness in this program that has been killed that has followed the rules in the 40 years of operation. so the coordination is excellent. information is passed freely from one agency to another when it affects a witness in the program. host: gerald shur founder of the witness protection program. now retired. guest: i would like to point out one more thing, the benefit of the program, and that is tens of thousands of criminals that are in penitentiaries' now as a result of this program. for the 10,000 or so witnesses and the program. there are tens of thousands of defendants that have been convicted.

>> an update on congress. they gaveled in today about the immigration bill. at 5:30 p.m. eastern. you can watch the snaft live right now on c-span2. >> the house returns tomorrow at noon eastern for speeches. 2:00 eern for legislative work. on the agenda this week bills dealing with offshore drilling along with one along the u.s. in the gulf of mexico. you can watch live coverage of the house tomorrow at noon eastern right here on c-span. and with the house not back until tomorrow some live

coverage planned for this afternoon. exico relations and an official at the homeland security. that's live here on c-span at 3:30 eastern. >> first ladies have a capacity for per son fying if they so choose. this is a pattern in women in politics. one is they are women, real people who actually do things. but then there is this secondary capacity of being a per son fying figure. and i think many a first lady has become a first lady and realized this thing was larger than life. that was something dolley figured out. she becomes a figure head for

her husband's administration and make it is white house a symbol. and all of this is happening in 1808. she doesn't know this but in 1814 the british are going to burn the capital city and all this work she put into helping the public identify with this house they called the white house under her term is going to pay off because it's going to give the surge of nationalism around the war. >> our focus on first ladies continues every monday night. tonight at 9:00 eastern on c-span. >> h.r. solutions week>> on wednesday, congressional leaders along with the vice president joe biden honored rederick douglass.

it included john boehner and nancy pelosi. harry reid and mitch mcconnell. ashington d.c. delegates eleanor holmes norton and ms. nettie washington douglass, the great, great-granddaughter of frederick douglass. this is over an hour. >> ladies and gentlemen, the speaker of the house of representatives, the honorable john boehner. [applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, good morning and welcome to emancipation hall. this is a proud day for all americans especially so for the leaders and the residents of the district of columbia. we have long labored to see this day come. we offer you our gratitude and congratulations today. [applause] the man whose statue we are gathered here to dedicate today was in the minds of many including abraham lincoln, one

of our greatest americans. he is depicted here today standing by a podium giving an address. we lean forward and listen carefully as captivated audiences once did. his name is frederick douglass. he said he was born into slavery sometime in february and eight to 18. he was never ever able to determine the day. -- in 1818. e had to tussle with his master's dog for food. he learned to read. he started with a bible. his lit a fire in him. a passion for liberty and you can still see in his eyes. indeed, once you learn how to read, he says, you will forever be free.

he resolved to escape. after a try or two, he succeeded. a remarkable story. yet, we are just getting -- started. he does not join the anti-slave movement, he becomes the voice. he writes books. he started a weekly newspaper. he is meeting with president lincoln about a better treatment for african-americans and the union army. still as he says, our work is not done. our speaker will go on to help the women's rights movement come into its own. he will be named the u.s. marshall, an ambassador. at the republican national convention, he became the first african-american to have the same taste in nomination -- his name placed in nomination for president. e will endure integrity.

frederick douglass set an example for unity that is unmatched. he is a man for all generations. today, we place him here with kinks -- kings and foreign leaders to seek inspiration. we do this not only to honor a giant but to remind one another of how richly blessed we are that such a man lived to prove that ambition is not a gift of status but a gift from god. anything is achievable through struggle and hard work. he would often say what is possible for me is also possible for you. that capitol has many statues and this one of frederick douglass will hold a special place in our hearts and in our capitol city.

thank you all for being here today. [applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, please stand for the presentation of colors by the united states armed forces and the singing of the national anthem. ♪ ♪

national anthem]

♪ ♪

>> ladies and gentlemen, please remain standing as the chaplain ives the invocation. > let us pray. oh hidden source of life, we are astounded by your great and gracious for you are an equal opportunity distributor of

alents and dreams. we thank you for this opportunity to place a statue in the united states capitol as a fitting tribute to frederick douglass who worked to ensure that our nation honors its promise of liberty and opportunity for all. ord, we are grateful for his commitment to freedom which inspires us to rededicate ourselves to the timeless principles he struggled to uphold. we praise you for his rejection of violence. his refusal to retreat on mportant issues.

and his ability to persuade allies in order to achieve his bjectives. inspired by his great life, empower us to serve your purposes for our lives and our generation by bringing deliverance to cap this in the recovery of sight to the morally and spiritually blind. we pray in your merciful name, amen. >> lisa be seated. -- please be seated.

>> the honorable eleanor holmes orton. >> thank you. mr. vice president, speaker boehner, harry reid, nancy pelosi, howard professor dr. edna g. medford and the douglass family led by its matriarch, ms. nettie washington douglass. the great, great granddaughter of frederick douglass who we all are pleased to welcome to the capitol today. [applause] it took a community to choose frederick douglass to represent the capitol joining statues

from the 50 states. and the entire congress to bring the statue to the capitol today. i especially find that it was d. c. residents who selected frederick douglass to represent the district and the capitol. our residents are accustomed to hosting national and international visitors who make the district their home. none before or since douglass however have so joined his national prominence and philosophy with the aspirations of the people of the district of columbia. douglass lived here for 23 of is 57 years as a free man. he knew and felt deeply about here he lived.

he refused to separate his life in the district from the quality of his courageous life. rising from bondage to become the most prominent abolitionist and a leader of the women's suffrage movement acknowledged even in his lifetime as one of the greatest americans. the district shares douglass with maryland and new york. but few new -- but few had him for his active life. as a resident of the distant columbia, building his home, cedar hill, here. a national historic site in southeast washington. too few know how douglass embedded himself in the life of the district of columbia serving most of his years here as a howard university trustee. even as he traveled the country and the world, there has been too little recognition that as a resident of d.c., he was nominated to three local posts which were the upper chamber of the d.c. council, part of the home rule government during reconstruction and as a u.s. marshall for the federal courts here. who knew frederick douglass ost the republican

nomination? is insistence on congressional voting rights and independent self-government. he struggle the residents of the district columbia continue today. for douglass, the district was no mere address. e lived what he stood for were ever he lived. some may know of my views that residents must enjoy self-government rights with other americans. i must confer to mr. douglass'

view is unmatched -- whose view s unmatched. in 1895, douglass spoke to -- spoke defiantly "to take sides." notwithstanding, he said, "the frowns or the smiles of the present government." he called the residents of the district "aliens, not citizens but subjects." and what he called "plenty taxation but not representation in the great politics of the country." mr. douglass did not submit his words but spoke with militancy and the voice of a local citizen at the height of his international celebrity.

today, we have his most famous ords, agitate, agitate inspired the district's determination to become the 51st state. douglass' life and his deep commitment to our equal rights are the reasons that his statue is here to be unveiled today as a gift from the almost 650,000 american citizens of the district of columbia. these are the reasons that the d.c. council authorized the statue of frederick douglass. the statue stands seven feet tall. frederick douglass stood even aller. as a world leader to his hometown and refused to temper his demands for congressional

voting rights at the local self-government for the residents of the district of columbia. this was the great douglass. this was frederick douglass of the district of columbia. thank you very much. [applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, the senator from new york, charles schumer. [applause] >> thank you. i am honored to speak at this location. first, i want to warmly welcome everybody for coming to join us today. this important and he start defense. especially all of the new yorkers. -- this is an important and istoric event. i want to recognize an eighth0grader who is a two-time winner of the frederick

douglass oratorical contest. [applause] we gather here today at emancipation hall to celebrate the remarkable legacy of a great, great man -- frederick douglass. for 25 years, he made his home in rochester, new york. he was a statesman, and abolitionist, a self-taught writer and an advocate for justice and freedom. it was in rochester where he published the influential anti-slavery newspaper "the northstar," was also largest african-american paper in the country. he fought for emancipation and equality and dignity for every american at a time when our democracy was far from perfect. he was the only african-american to attend the first women's rights convention in 1848 in seneca falls, new ork.

rochester incidentally was the center of the fight for freedom throughout the 19th century. -- seneca falls is a short distance from rochester. rederick douglass lived in washington, d. c. where he served in many positions including federal marshal and president of the freedman's poss including federal marshal and president of the freedman's savings and trust company while he carried on as a national leader for syllable rights. -- civil rights. rest his body was laid to in 1895, the people of rochester erected the first monument honoring him in 1899. the people of washington, d. c. have also undertook this great

man who called their city home at the latter years of his life. i want to thank the people of washington for generously donating this sculpture which will be seen by millions of visitors every year. it is not an accident that his statue stands here next to the marker dedicated to the enslaved laborers who built the capitol that completed the capitol dome during the civil war. these workers were among the millions of slaves who frederick douglass, a former slave himself, dedicated his life to free. the statue of frederick otherss joins three elite sculptures of african-americans in the u.s. capitol. martin luther king jr., rosa parks, sojourner truth.

for too long, the capitol collection of statues failed to include courageous african- americans who led some the most important movements in the nation's and world's history. the installation of this statue in a place named emancipation hall is just one step toward correcting that glaring omission. the base of the statue bears an inscription with the words frederick douglass and was said -- famously said 155 years ago. he said, "if there is no struggle, there is no progress." after a long struggle, millions of tourists who come across a country no longer have to wait to see this statue and the place where it belongs. now this generation and future generations can honor the legacy of furtive douglass at the center of democracy -- frederick douglass at the center

of democracy he fought for. there is no more fitting way of honoring him than with this statue. thank you. [applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, dr. edna g. medford of howard university. [applause] >> thank you and good morning. thank you so much all of you for being here on this important occasion. today, we honor a man whose life taxable fights a deep commitment to human and civil rights both at home and abroad. that he lived at a time when many americans accepted without hesitation one person's ownership of another. when inequality was for white men only makes his legacy all

the more extraordinary. despite having been born into slavery, he spent most of his 77 years rejecting any limitations on his own ambitions. as system that all people enjoy dignity and fair treatment. no motto, "where there is struggle, there is no progress," signaled his commitment to fight for fellow african-americans and slavery and freedom. women who have been done my -- who have been denied equal standing in society. and the many others who faced oppression. douglass began his own personal struggle on maryland's eastern shore and continued in baltimore where he was able to expand his narrowly defined literacy.ugh

a privilege denied to most enslaved people. it encouraged him at 20 to still away to the north. along with his freeborn wife, anna, he later writes -- laid claim to the rights of other free men. to exercise a political voice, equal to all other citizens. within a few years, he joined the ranks of abolitionists and his oratorical skills landed him to providing an eloquent and fearless voice that articulated and needs and desires at the african-american community. to challenged the nation

live up to its creed of the quality of all. before he reached 30, he had written the first of three autobiographies and had made his first trip to the british isles where he found support for his effort to eradicate slavery in america. a decade later, civil war pitted one section of the country against the other. his condemnation urged a review -- a reluctant union and the president to embrace the goal of freedom for nearly 4 million enslaved people. he encouraged the union to open its ranks to black men. when it did, he used his name and his persuasive abilities to convince them that taking up the union cause helped to destroy slavery and secure their right to be treated as citizens. during the war, he advised president lincoln on matters involving the welfare of these men walk continuing to press for equality for african- americans throughout the country. when his home in new york burned under mysterious circumstances in 1872, he moved to washington where for nearly

two decades he championed the causes affecting residents including full political participation. he continued to work for the nationwide advancement of african-americans. he provided over the freedmen's bank every -- bank. during the years he was a resident here that he lent his support as a trustee to the recent established howard university where african- americans could pursue a formal education that he had been denied.

he served the institution for 25 years. he was never elected to public office. his demonstrated skill led to several appointments including 2 local positions. they have been mentioned. united states marshal and recorder of deeds. in the international arena, he served as a minister to haiti and the dominican republic. he viewed these opportunities not as personal successes, but indicators of the progress of the race. abolitionist, orator, author, statesman, defender of women's rights, champion of civil rights for all. he believed as the pretzels espoused in the documents -- in the principles espoused in the nation's documents.

in his words, "a nation as there should be no bridge among no port -- there should be no rich, no poor, no high, no low, no black, no white." this statue is representative of the people of the district, a fitting tribute of a man who never faltered to secure the rights of all people to control their own destiny. he would be proud to be represented here and proud that his spirit of perseverance and determination remain with the people of the district of columbia. [applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, mrs. laurie williams. â♪

♪ ♪ oh, freedom oh, freedom

oh, freedom over me and before i would be a slave, i would be buried in my grave. to my lord and be free more crying no nore dying -- no more crying no more dying and before i would be a slave, i would be buried in my grave. and to go home to my lord and be free.

there'll be singing. there'll be singing. there'll be singing over me. and before i would be a slave, would be buried in my grave. and to go home to my lord and be free. and before i would be a slave, would be buried in my grave.

and go home to my lord and be free. and be free. ♪ ♪ [applause]

>> ladies and gentlemen, the democratic leader of the house of representatives, the honorable nancy pelosi. [applause] >> good morning, everyone. mr. vice president, mr. speaker, leader reid and mcconnell. ofator schumer, the sponsor the bill brings us here today. and of course our colleague and called -- and congresswoman,

eleanor holmes norton. congratulations, this is your day. [applause] dr. edna g. medford and nettie, congratulations to you and your family. midnight ago, as approached in 1863, frederick douglass gathered with fellow abolitionists in tremont temple in boston with great anticipation as they waited the official news of emancipation. knowing that freedom of people and the character of a nation hung in the balance. describing the spirit in that room, frederick douglass would later write, "we were awaiting for a bolt from the sky. watching by the light of the stars for the dawn of the new day. we will long for the answer to

the prayers or centuries." since escaping slavery, he had agitated to usher the dawn of a new day. as the clock struck midnight, an agonizing prayer was answered. resident lincoln -- president lincoln signed the emancipation proclamation. it would take until june 19 to reach texas. this year on new year's eve, a group of members went to the national archives to reach and that 150th anniversary of the emancipation proclamation and to recognize all who helped make

a reality. totainly, more than central that cause was frederick douglass. in that time, he stood tall at the center of the battle for abolition and civil rights. for an american that lived up to the creed of the quality. starting today, frederick douglass will stand tall at the u.s. capitol, a tribute to his leadership, his permanent place, and a pantheon of history. frederick douglass earned fame and recognition as an abolitionist and a leader. but is also a leader in the fight for women's suffrage. many of us celebrated frederick douglass another time by visiting pinnacle falls on the wonder 50th anniversary of the

speech -- seneca falls on the 150th anniversary. visitebrate him when we the national historic site right here in washington, d. c. as a person born in baltimore, i know elijah and donna and other colleagues take pride in his maryland association as well. when it comes to equality in our country, richard douglass -- frederick douglass' voice is still being heard. it at the center of d.c. voting rights and his decision to spend the last years of his life at cedar hill in washington. 600,000he more the citizens of washington bluefly a statue finally rubbers -- will finally see a statue

representing them in the relentless efforts of congresswoman eleanor holmes norton. we know a single statue is not enough. frederick douglass and so many of us want full representation in the halls of congress and as he wrote of the people of d.c. "they have made their voice --" inmust wrong this right history and give d.c. the voice it deserves. [applause] 50 years ago tom a president kennedy spoke -- 50 years ago, president kennedy spoke about civil rights. he spoke for the first time of it as a moral issue. he reminded us that our nation will not be totally free until

all of our citizens are free. today, with a statue of frederick douglass, we honor a man of moral vision known by many as the father of the civil rights movement. a leader who worked to make our nation fully free. he joins fellow heroes on that journey who have been acknowledged who are present in the capitol. martin luther king jr., sojourner truth, rosa parks to his rightful place in the capitol. we want more. he understood the truth of douglass' statement. it never did and it never will. frederick douglass demanded freedom. he demanded a nation that stayed true to its ideals. he demanded and helped achieve a more perfect union. we still have work to do. there are many causes -- things

on this beautiful statue. is it a beautiful? man soul that is in me, no can degrade." how perfect. how beautiful. may it long stand as a testament to the inspirational life and timeless message and extraordinary leadership of frederick douglass. thank you. [applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, throughout the leader of the senate, the honorable mitch mcconnell. thehe republican leader of

senate, the honorable mitch mcconnell. [applause] >> mr. vice president, thank you for being with us and my colleagues on the stage. 13 years ago, we broke ground thate visitor's center surrounds us. the idea was that the american people when they came to visit their representatives in washington deserved a place that would help them appreciate the history of this great country. and in pursuit of that goal, congress specifically authorized the creation of emancipation hall. the idea, the arena where we are now gathered together, to bring attention to the contributions of the enslaved laborers who helped to build the

capitol. it is fitting that the original is located here. the statue is self located on the roof of the capitol. it was done by a slave. he's a free man by the time he finished. it is fitting that we dedicate the statue today. like the parade, frederick douglass -- phillip reed, frederick douglass entered this world in shackles. and he left free. somes illegal in jurisdictions to even teach a slave to read. he found a way to not only become literate but to expect slavery and achieve -- escape slavery and achieve great

things. as a free man, he became a leader in the abolitionist movement. an orator,a teacher, a gifted writer, a presidential advisor, and a leader of the republican party. which he described as the party of freedom and progress. in short, he became a powerful voice for the betterment of all nations and its citizens. as has been said previously, at the 1888 republican convention, he became the first african- american to get a roll call vote for president. another party nominated him as vice president. why? he was recognized as a leader area a man who gave his all for his country and dedicated his liberty to the freedom of others.

[applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, the honorable harry reid. [applause] >> a decade after president abraham lincoln's death, frederick douglass spoke in praise to the great and mr. pater. -- emancipator. it only gave greater life to the he works spirit of abraham lincoln. it is no wonder that lincoln and douglass felt such an affinity for one another. present lincoln rose from poverty to preserve the union. douglass escaped slavery to inspire a movement. it is fitting that frederick douglass and his voice of freedom and unyielding advocate

should be honored with an enduring monument. it is just and proper that 600 thousand american citizens who reside in the district of columbia should have a statue representing them here. washington, d.c. residents pay taxes just like those from nevada and california and any other state. they have fought and died in every war. washington, d.c. residents deserve the same right to self- government in congressional representation like any other state. [applause] the district of columbia deserves statehood. [applause] it is to show how serious i am

this, i signed my name as a sponsor. [applause] sponsoring legislation is one thing, but congress should act to grant the statehood to a gift of 600,000 people, the same privilege that every other citizen has. [applause] this is not some unique idea i came up with. this is close to frederick douglass' heart. he championed many causes, he was also an a wavering advocate for equal rights for district of columbia residents. days before the end of the civil war, he spoke of the right of every american with regards to race and gender to vote at the ballot box and represent

congress. this is what he said. "if he knows enough to pay taxes that support the government money, he knows enough to vote. representation should go together. if he knows enough to shoulder a musket and fight for the flag, he knows enough to vote. this applies to women also." district still lack a data district breath -- district residents still lack a vote. it citizens submit to rules. there is no better historical figure to represent the district and frederick douglass. lawmakers should not only honor his legacy but also an act of

congress. [applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, the speaker of the house, john boehner. >> let me thank my colleagues for their testimonials. we are fortunate to have many honored guests. you are about to hear from 2 of them. let me express how grateful i am to senator schumer and congresswoman norton for helping us fill this hole with 600 guests to

represent a cross-section of frederick douglass life and his legacy. that includes mayor great and easy counsel -- gray and the d.c. council. and his longtime home in rochester. we are joined by guests representing his travels throughout europe as well as museum directors from across the country and members of boards these are the men and women who long before and long after give their time and energy to preserving frederick douglass is life and work. our most special guest today and you would agree are the students and educators here in the d. c. area including frederick douglass high school in maryland. welcome to all of you. [applause] of course, we are grateful to

the white house and the obama administration for recognizing the importance of this day. it is my honor and privilege to introduce to you the vice president of the united states, joe biden. [applause] >> thank you very much, mr. speaker. thank you all very much. mr. speaker, leader pelosi, leader mcconnell and reid and ms. nettie washington douglass, what a proud day for your family. dr. edna g. medford, great to see you here. dr. black and reverend. most of all, laurie williams. you have the voice of an angel. you are amazing. [applause]

thank you for having me here. i am honored to be here. thank you for fighting so hard for this day. mitch, i agree with you. frederick douglass was -- frederick douglass was a great republican, one of my favorites. [laughter] as are you mitch, as are you. he was born in a horrific circumstance sanctioned by the laws passed in this very building. he embraced the stated principles and used them as a sort to try and free others. he fought to make it live up to this capitol and those enabling words -- ennobling words in the constitution.

the victory over slavery is june 1 three. -- 13. the message finally got to texas. i did not mean it the way it sounded. [laughter] it just took time. it took a long time to get to delaware. the passage of the 13th and 14th amendments. he lived as has been pointed out to serve this government as a statesman and in other capacities. there's largely no one who fought harder for citizenship and full quality than frederick douglass. over a century ago, douglass asked a good question. he asks, what the people -- what have the people of the district and done that and they should be excluded from the privileges of the ballot box?

many representatives and residents like representative norton can trace their families back to former slaves. seeking freedom and helped to build the city. we agreed with you, the president and i, and frederick douglass and support home rule, budget autonomy, and the vote for the people of the district of columbia. the people of the district made the right choice in selecting frederick douglass as a representative. they put eleanor holmes norton and douglass in this capitol. i do not see either of them leaving until all of the district residents get their voice. [applause]

>> our last speaker has the distinction of being an heir to two great americans. the great-granddaughter of booker t. washington and the great, great-granddaughter of frederick douglass. she is also the founder and chairwoman of the frederick douglass family initiatives. ladies and gentlemen, join me in welcoming ms. nettie washington douglass. [applause] >> thank you very much. i want to thank you so much for sharing your love and respect

for frederick douglass and give me that warm greeting. i appreciate it. i would like to first start by thanking vice president joe biden, house speaker joe byner, john boehner, nancy pelosi, senator schumer, congresswoman norton, a special thank you. on this day, all of the classic written work, the famous quotes, the powerful speeches, and remarkable a collusion of a frederick douglass will be -- and remarkable collections of frederick douglass will be enshrined in emancipation hall. those treasures belong to history.

the belief and spirit still belong to me. frederick douglass believed as a human being that all of us regardless of our race, gender, religion, or sexual orientation were born to live free and equal. how easy it would have been up for a man born into chains to have the opposite view. frederick douglass believed as an american that the u.s. constitution and the declaration of independence were conceived to elevate every citizen of this great country. how easy it would have been for a man born without a country to reject its most sacred texts. he believed as an individual that reconciliation and

forgiveness made us better as he wrote to his former owner saying "i love you, but hate slavery." how easy it would have been up for a man that had so much misplaced loathing to carry the burden of hatred to his grave, but he did not. frederick douglass believes -- douglass' belief was also beyond understanding. i hold so closely to my heart the spirit of the man i am lucky enough to call my great, great- grandfather. and though i cling tightly, he is not mine alone. frederick douglass date in spirit as a birthright to all of us. on behalf of his family, i would

like to say we are humbled by the honor of this handsome bronze statue in this glorious hall. at the same time, we pray the spirit of frederick douglass will be as intensely in your heart in the hearts of people everywhere. thank you. [applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, the army chorus. ♪

our eyes have seen the glory of the dawning

hallelujah is marching on [singing "the battle hymn of

republic"] glory, glory, hallelujah hallelujahy, our god is marching on

born coming -- christ was across the sea with a glory in his bosom that ransfigure you and me make men holy, let s die to make men free, while god is marching on glory, hallelujah glory, glory, hallelujah

hallelujahy, smarchi -- while god is marching on hymn of thee battle

republic"] ♪ [applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, please remain standing for the benediction. >> let us pray. we give you thanks almighty god for the appearance among us of great profits and for the freedom and humility we exercise this day in honoring frederick douglass. the abolition of slavery, universal and equal education for all, the desegregation of american schools, the right to vote not only for black males in his own time, but for women as well and the rights of immigrants. by an exese championed

slave who lived in the middle of the 19th century. wewe leave this place, remain challenged by the echoes of frederick douglass is poetic oice. on issues that persist to our own time. may we never forget the incredible bravery and sacrifices of those like frederick douglass who call us to greatness as american citizens. , to us the grace, oh god remain vigilant, that no person in our great land should ever suffer injustice like so many of our national heroes and heroines once a data. .lease bless us all

dear god, less america. .men >> ladies and gentlemen, please remain at your seats for the departure of the official party. >> an update on congress, the u.s. senate dabbled in earlier to continue debate on the immigration bill. harry reid has set the stage for the board to advance -- for the bill to advance with date security measurement. passage is expected sometime this week. see the senate live right now on

our companion network, c-span 2. on the agenda for the week, several ills dealing with offshore oil drilling. watch live coverage of the house and members dabble in tomorrow beginning at noon eastern on c-span. with the u.s. house not returning until tomorrow, we have live coverage planned for this afternoon. discussion on us-mexico relations with the mexican ambassador. he used to be the u.s. head of -- and and order in border protection agency. >> first ladies have a capacity to be personified if they so choose.

this is a pattern in american women in politics. two things. one is they are real people who actually do things. then there is this secondary capacity of being a personifying figure, i charismatic to give. first ladies have come and realize they are larger than life. forbecomes the speaker had her husband's position. all of this is happening in 1808. she doesn't know it, but in 1814 the purchaser going to bring the capital city and all of this work she put into helping the public identify with this house that they call the white house under her term is going to pay off because it is going to give a surge of nationalism around the war. >> our focus on first ladies continues every monday night.

why we studyram, first ladies, tonight on c-span. >> this afternoon, we are joined by michael daniel and richard. richard is with mandy and and \michael is with -- the white house, side -- kind of a cyber coordinator, cyber czar in the white house advancing policy. we're going to talk about the primary issue i'm pretty much the mind of every ceo we talked to that comes through the journal. inevitably the conversation returns to cybersecurity. up until now we have heard extraordinary language. the administration has said this

is the largest left of intellectual property in the history of mankind of that has been going on for the last couple of years. the pentagon has a couple countries as being propagators of this, china particularly. 9:00 in the morning until 5:00 in the afternoon shift accessing government computers and military contractors. there was an extraordinary report earlier this year that identified china, the pla, right down to a building outside of shanghai, i believe. where this work was being done. we know it is a bad problem. all of us have these great concerns. today we're going to talk a little bit about some of the solutions. as soon as i get my ipad back,

i'm going to call -- asked a couple of audience response questions about how much you believe you have already been hacked. since i'm waiting for that, why don't we just start? rich, you worked on the china report. your company is in the is this of helping the private sector, like companies represented in this room, mitigate these problems once they start. what question should cfo's, a lot of whom have the cio reporting to them, the chief information officer, what questions should they be asking these days about their company and hacking gecko -- hacking? click there are three questions i recommend you ask your cio or head of security. the first is what is the classification for all digital

incidents in the last quarter, the last year? you want a number. trending over time is ideal, but any number to start with. secondly, what is the amount of time from the time that event occurred to win someone dealt with it? the average of all those incidents. the third question you want to ask is, is our company a member of something called the -- first. first.org is the website. for example, you might have several intrusions per year. the average containment time, if you want to use that term, is days or hours. and we are a member of first. thumbs up. you're doing very well. more likely you will find out

you do not know what the count is, you do not know how to quickly you're dealing with those problems, and to not a member of that organization. there are ways to get there. i had a discussion with general electric in 2007. the answers were don't know, don't know. all right. so, the last report we created showed the average time for that second question was 240 days. now, eight months of having an injured or do anything they want before anyone moves -- that's one of those felt the groups. we are not talking of garden righty kid in the basement. we are talking an advanced intruder. two thirds of the time, you are being told by the fbi or an outside agency. when i worked at ge, our cio

gave us a one-hour mandate. he said, any computer in the company, within one hour you up to find the intrusion and contain it. that is the goal to shoot for. if you can do it in one hour, it takes a very elite team to execute their mission to steal your data within that window. >> did you achieve that? >> yes, but it's a nine to 12 months of loss of investment. >> was that a computer anywhere in the world? >> yes. >> china, india, were ever? >> yes. >> give us a sense of that. how many hours, hamid people? >> we started out in 2007 the literal army of one. i was the first person to be assigned this problem. we had 13 people. we had -- a c per year. >> what you mean?

>> her employee. >> that does not;. >> when you're charging $.25 per seat for antivirus, it's ready significant. -- it's pretty significant. >> oh, i see. is that something that could be duplicated at public dump in these -- >> no, absolutely you can duplicate it. the problem is this is not a problem you solved by buying some kind of vendor products. i'm a vendor. if someone tries to sell you a shiny new box and say, just put this on your network and you'll be fine, you will have the same problem you had earlier. >> a 24-hour monitoring, and they would call with some suspicion -- >> it's even more than that. it was not sitting waiting for calls. you're out there looking for

those guys. that is the key. you cannot sit behind your wall and poke your head over and hope no one is coming over. you have to be looking. we coined the term "hunting" for the atmosphere -- for the adversary. do not assume you are clean. the chances are he's already there. it you have to be there looking for him. the more you do, the better you get, the faster you get overtime. >> you have polling questions and it is right there on your ipad. you can answer right there on your ipad. and there are techs in the room who are happy to tell you. how many of you have lost proprietary information to hackers? yes, no, don't know. has anyone else, any other large company duplicated this general electric model of a one-hour response to an intrusion?

>> i would say -- i don't know specifics around to be one hour, although the idea of aggressive on the network is widespread now in the defense industrial base and also the financial sector. and there are elements of other sectors too about this constant contact with the adversary over the last several years you are adopting that model. as you it quite a bit in the energy sector as well. cracks absolutely. -- >> absolutely. so by hunting, there are certain types of code you look for or ip addresses to look for? >> yes. artifacts, elements of the adversary you can look or and when you find it, you say he has been year or has been here. now we need to kick him out. >> ok. >> the other question is we always recommend to the company, do you have a mitigation plan if

the bad guys do something, not to steal your data, but to do something to your data, do you have a plan? have you tested it? >> what kind of responses would you get? >> it's all over the map. some companies have good plans they have tested. they probably had something bad happened to them in the past. others have no idea. >> the saudi example. >> that was a distrusted attack on their system where they wiped the master boot records off about 30,000 hard drives. >> what was their backup pla was the backup plan? >> they didn't have much of one. i think the open source reporting shows they operated along maintain being the business system by paper and

fax until they could rebuild the network by purchasing new machines. the way you want to do it. lost of you say you have proprietary information to hackers. lost y you have not proprietary information to hackers. 31% say don't know. look at the stats what would you make of the 27% and 31%? i would say the don't know are being honest and the ones to get with your i.t. and security staffs. a question down to of definitions. not everyone in this room the ugh guessing who is in room maybe that is not true but not everyone is necessarily the sponsored tate industrial espionage but knowing ort of who is in the room i'm guessing many are so it is a higher percentage than i would customer he normal base. if you did anything interested

nd you have data that reflects what you do your a target. if you are doing a negotiation a joint venture or going to acquire a company in china, if china is going to one of your companies, they have penetrated your your data andolen know the details of the negotiations and are sitting there when you do the with your plan translat translated. hear people say yes. this is the new reality of dealing with that sort of adversary. it is part of their business process and their due diligence deal.hey do a >> when you are across the table who seems well prepared they are. >> exact. > second question, have you been contacted by hrurplt regarding an -- law enforcement intrusion in your network?

whilel, let's turn to you we wait for people to answer this. legislative ife landscape. is no gnashing of teeth this but there seems to be a fair number of speed bumps reason for an executive order. can you walk us through where stands and why an executive order? the first point i would make is the fact that it taking a while to get to legislation that can pass the president enate and can sign shouldn't be a surprise. lunch but howg at this is a hard problem with different amounts of complexity. is a critical issue for our

society and it is not surprising a wide variety of opinions about how to address the problem. we are the fact that having a good healthy debate about that and about this issue n congress and right way to solve the problem is good for us. i think it will produce better run.slation in the long i would rather do it this way through this process then in the aftermath of a crisis which doesn't usually tend to result in the best legislation. you could argue we are well into the crisis the greatest of intellectual property. >> i'm thinking of something more destructive in the end result. what i would say is right now what you have seen is the house version of its information sharing bill called security sharing and protection act. the senate intelligence committee is in the development bill.s own version of that there are also other cyber

security bills floating around oth the house and senate homeland committees. senate commerce committee has a several there are others from the armed services committee in various forms. a great see is there is deal of movement and activity on front. islative what led to the executive order is the cyber security out lation stalled particularly in the senate. they had put together a large lieberman-collins bill that couldn't get over the hurdles in the senate. the administration decided to do executiveuld under an order, which the president actually signed the day of the in february.union the executive order is focused on doing three things. focused on enabling and driving federal agencies it do a better job pushing out to the private volume, ncreasing the quality and timeliness of the information we share with the

private sector. the executive g order does is bakes in a lot of civil liberty protections based on the fair nformation practice principles with i my privacy officers got e to say and bakes them in the processes the federal government is using in the cyber security area. directed the national institutes of standards and technology at the department of lead an effort with industry to develop a framework of best practices and standards cyber security that in particular we could apply to infrastructure. what ultimately in our minds i think the framework would be by almost any company to raise the baseline level of across the board. it won't deal with all the threalike what richard was talked about. sau pseudonumber for --

for china and russia. >> it is for any organizations in their countries technical capability. raise that baseline level of cyber security particularly the critical board.tructure across the that is what the executive order is aimed at doing. we have the executive order signed and we are about over four , just months into implementation, we are back to working with congress to get legislation over line.nish >> this would be voluntary, isn't that right? correct. >> what are the incentives or running for a company what is defined as a critical partake in re to this? >> that is one of the things we congress about in the legislation that you see about what is out there the right september instructor

o -- right incentive to encourage the uptake of the framework. ultimately one thing that we developmento see is of an insurance market in this -- one of would help the problems is there is not -- to do theto under under writing to enable the thrive at arket it the level we want. if we could encourage that it develop, that would be useful. something that there are a whole series of reports on to the es that were due president last week which were turned in and we are in the rocess of reading and we will make public toward the end of the month. >> liability is an issue. i'm a company and sharing information with you about my customers that you need as the or third party organizati organization, i get into liability issues. >> yes. i think that where the administration has been is we're providing that liability, targeted liability

protection, particularly for back with ormation the government. i think that one thing i have is the more we have dug into this issue the more complicated it gets. figuring out how to translate broad policy almost es that i think everyone agrees and translating it into statutory text that the will tell you works turned out to being quite challenging. hat is something we are spending a lot of time on now. > in answer to the question have you been contacted by law enforcement regarding an ntrusion to your network 34% say yes rb, 66% of you have not voicemail.r no, you have not been contacted by enforcement intrusion.an what is critical infrastructure? line?do you draw it dam? electrical power grid?

retailing operations? services? >> that is an interesting question. e largely work off of what the department homeland security has defined in the national nfrastructure protection plan as critical infrastructure. there are about 16 different sectors that include things such electricity, oil, natural healthcare,rtation, water supply is part of it. i think that there are varying agrees of risk and concern over critical infrastructures but that is largely the universe we focus on. advising , you are companies. does this plan, this initiatives these by government, from the standpoint of private companies your company's advice, does this plan make sense? tothe companies that we talk that we help, they are very much

concerned about liability rotection because there's generally no up side to revealing that you have had an intrusion. differing thoughts on what is material if you are a and you traded company have s.e.c requirements to report material events to shareholde shareholders. find that companies -- to a few example only organizations said they had a severe intrusion from china or anyplace. google. "new hamber of commerce, york times." it is rare. when you hear about an intrusion personally e identifiable information was is trying the company to comply with the 47 different state laws out there. >> there is some desire, i for some type of overall legislation that would allow for reporting standard. just to give you an example, a

state of was public south carolina, their reporting cost just to tell their citizens lost data was $12 million. above the ll, well cost of responding to the intrusion. it was all the reporting that of the -- cost most of the money. there was an obligation it make it public on whose personal breached.t have been is that what that was? one ofwas $12 million to the big major credit bureaus to so tor credit for the next many months or years. that was the bulk, as well as statutes.th the state as a state they had probably ess, it is not like amazon was breached and they had customers all over the world. but that is a significant chunk. we would like to see something along the lines of easier protection.iability then an easier way to share

information. are the things we tend to hear from customers. >> where does the government's end and busine business's begin? what is being breached here? what are the borders? the u.s. protects its physical borders. government responsible for protecting these new cyber business?r is that >> i think that is actually the fundamental question we are trying to answer as a society. what is the federal government's role in cyber security? business's role in cyber security? people space a lot of talk about it like it is some dimension not l connected to the physical world. servers, hose boxes, routers, wires, exist in someone's country. territory somewhere. so, that means that cyberspace

connected to the physical geography. so, geography matters in cyberspace. you cannot just map the rules of the physical cyberspace. you can make a credible argument cyberspace ce with is there is no such thing as the interior. everyone lives at the border. of the way cyberspace is constructed you all live at the border. ll of us whether in our personal lives or corporate lives. as a result, it is physically that construct to assign the role of border security to the federal in the nt like we do physical realm. it has to be a sheared responsibility between the companies and individuals. i think that trying to work out he burdens of that responsibility is what we are trying to do now. one model we talk about a lot is -- this space is because of that -- should we think more about in federal government's role cyb

cyberspace as factor management. thing the government does run the national weather service. e collect information from radars and buoys and weather generate a weather map so we can know if a bad storm is coming. role you could foresee is rovide that kind of service in cyberspace to provide that indication and warning of what cyberspace. out in then to extend that model an event f you have that begins to overwhelm local capacity, that is when the step l government would in. just as not every storm in the physical world necessary states federal response, not every event in cyberspace even if it overseas would necessitate a federal response. but if it got large and bad when the federal government would step in. that is one model. in it think everybody, but that is the conversation we

need to have. and protection notes data is a big part of this discussion. how much citizens are willing to shareprivate companies to with the government and the government to share with private will go because it pwefrt ways. es government discuss something or discovers something that others don't know about the problem. that is far from being resolved. that we haveosures been watching the last couple of activity, is .s.a. that informing that debate? because there seems to have been part of sions on the the n.s.a. that resolved these sticky questions. >> i think that what it does is highlights the fact that this is an ongoing issue with all of information. the administration has had a

very strong stance from the cyber security legislation and said you have to ake in privacy and civil liberties concerns from the get go. the ve said when we set up information sharing regimes particularly from the private sector back it the government, to make sure that the irrelevant personally identifiab identifiable information is sent ed out before it is to the government. minimization. happen.to see that we want to make sure that there are appropriate use limitations that is shared with the government so that we, meaning that the government can information shared channels ber security for cyber security purposes. e want to make sure that is part of how we set up the information sharing regimes. the type u hear about

information that the government seeing or ed in companies could provide to the company, it is not customer information. look at the mandate report. mandate.c the report go to and download it you won't find a shred of personal information. is all technical indicators, ways to find intruders on the network. to the rovide that governme government, the government provides that to the private sector. personally identify al information. no one it the private sector one to provide it and no in the government wants to get it or provide it back. n.s.a. and disclosure disclosures, what lessons do you have you hat lessons observed coming to you in that , in ere in the air force the security and network systems with general ctor

electric. what lessons are we learning n.s.a. disclosures? is there a higher tolerance of information rsonal or listening in on people than we thought? show it is kind of split. a ond, what went wrong from security standpoint at the national security agency that out?information got >> the takeaway i have from if more comes is out it is confirming what people like myself and others have said that the united states targets what we would consider sources for information, meaning foreign government, rtune for the purpose intelligence service. we do not hack into other people's networks to steal economic begin. if you were to do poll on the if your answer yes company ever received stolen data from a company the u.s. government hacked into you would 100% no. i have never worked anywhere

that has ever received stolen obtained bythat was u.s. government hackers. that is not something that happens in our country. when you hear the chinese or eople saying you do it, too this, is not true. that is the difference. f the chinese or russians had constrained activity to u.s. u.s. ment, u.s. military, intel community, state department, whatever, that is acceptable. do.t is what governments >> we don't hack the telecom suspect of security breaches around the word? hack the big military maker?ft waway has over said done that. can't speak to any ongoing operations but it is a stated policy of the government and like-minded governments that you don't do this, which is tough to

say ciate and some people you should, go forward. do this. that is not the way the united conducts operations. >> what happened at the n.s.a. that this stuff got out? do you think happened 1234 >> i don't know. i was coached not to speculate speculate. i will say it does illustrate insiders can particularly devastating and although is by far the ty placed volume one well insider can be devastating. >> we will go to questions in a second. one more issuess before we do. you can send questions on the raise your hands. is a polling question on the ipad. my company should be allowed to stolen k to retrieve information or prevent its exploitation. this s in the news now, discussion has kind of gotten

going. my company should be allowed to back. 2% agree with that, 68% disagree. should companies be allowed to their stuff, get maybe freeze up somebody's computer they find their data on? it is my professional opinion that the level of effort equired to do that in a responsible way and to get a high.t return is too you are not going to -- you are going to encounter more trouble than if youi think, just focused your attention on defending your network. what source of troubles? feels good. >> i will not deny the number question when i go to a company and they say what do we do, i want to get these guys. has that emotional response and we try to talk them off the ledge and say it is not worth it. it does make for a great

buzzword and feels good and we will get them. that is tly, i think what we have a government for and law enforcement and that is the realm. is illegal now. you are not supposed to do it. >> most people consider it illegal. the reason i say that is the law. >> among those. taking a global perspective who are some companies have written reports based on them hacking into other ountries and publishing their results. >> other countries have different rules. too high. costs are what do you mean? >> whenever i have talked about this the ndered about john counsels have said we do not want to expose ourselves to allegations that company x is hacking. too dangerous. >> something the administration is thinking about from a law to allow a point little more black ops? >> no. what we are talking about is do

liability look at protection for companies taking ction on their own networks that might have an adverse for quence in terms of, example, if you block legitimate traffic because it is actually a compromised host provider someplace and you might from o be protected liability for that. but that is taking actions in a your own capacity on networks. we share very much richard's point of view that like the sort the idea of hacking back into other people's networks produce worse results than the consequences -- consequences will be far worse than what may be that the ranted satisfaction of hitting back i understand. i just don't think that is a space to be in. and it is one of the things we norm of behavior in cyberspace we don't want to

any it into the wild west more than it already is. >> right. or comparison has been made description made that you shut was serving that the person that did the hacking and it was also serving the next door is the danger. >> correct. >> we will take questions now. to the ipad unless there is one right here. >> very impressive results on one-hour response time and stopping infiltration. when you got to your ideal state and assuming infiltration had taken place were you also able what was taken? right away, but you do bring up a key point that i mention. the one hour was if i could tell

chief that who was the information security officer, if i could say i know everything got inhis kiss, how they and who it is and by shoulding any down i'm not losing source of intelligence. there were cases when somebody broke in and i looked at it and i can't tell how they got in. we got lucky on this one. we better not shut this off lose thef we do i will only source i have to see who they are and i say i need to watch because nd i cannot tell exactly what is happening. thankfully that became fewer and or happened less as we got better visibility around the network. figuring out what they stole took a lot of engineering. saw them begin it steal data, it is encrypted, a copy because we got to it quickly but you have to have ninjas figure out how

disappears t and he two weeks and says this is what he took. better, they get better. they start to bring in their -- the c team with the b team then the a team. we have seen it escalate over course of years. reporting ook at the n this space, some that mandy does and versus does, right now 80% or maybe 90% rely on known fixable vulnerabilities. that means we know about them and know how to fix them and the in.guys still get if we could plug more of those holes it would -- that is why adversary can use their c defensesms because our are so bad. if we forced them to use their a teams more frequently they have them and that would slow them down.

> the question from graham smith that is related to this point. knob has mentioned the critical have to play combatting cyber attacks and aising every employee's awareness of good security practices is one of the most mportant responsibilities for c.f.o.'s and c.i.o.'s. >> i agree. we ve a technical team and have tools that find stuff. one of my better sources is my employees. show me things we haven't seen. i agree. making sure you are doing that is training interesting and has measurable resul results. i have some friends that started company and they conduct phishing tests and had will phish your entire company and can ratchet it up and i will tell you what. if you send out an announcement a $200 hat you have won bin you are going to get almost

everybody to click on it or if say the healthcare benefits are being cut you will get everybody to click on it. gone through ve that drill they get wiser. of course they will be mad those e-mails. cy ops. another question over here. over here?ns in which case another sent in. effective are the top 20 security, critical security put forth by sans. >> there is a group called sans. i won't tell you what it used to but they are considered one of the premier security training organizations out there. set of 20 his controls. controls is a little bit of a misnomer because some of the as broad as incident response program which

network, that is a huge but it represents more or less the consensus around what is needed as a program. surprised if a lot of that doesn't end up in the fewework away heard about a -- we heard about. >> i suspect you will see the ramework reflect a lot of that work. a lot of it is straightforward stuff. lifting for applications on the network and those sorts of things. talking the other vening and here is a tech company that makes disk drives number ofroportionate problems that result on the still from the employee clicking on the attachment attachment. the dominant reasons they have have to do nd cleaning up afterwards.

s that one instance where the mployee clicks on the attachment. still the case that internet hygiene problem is the companies spend millions of dollars for mitigation? is unreasonable to expect every employee to be able crafted a very well attack in that manner. a have seen cases where trusted vendor has been compromised. vendor, the bad guy uses his e-mail system to send e-mails that are perfect or language of choice and coming from the trusted vendor and signed with the of that trusted -- and for all purposes he sends it, it is about a conversation you have already been having and it has the purchase order you expecting. when that happens, you are going

to be in trouble. now, companies have gotten better at this and over the years we have seen that success rate go down. but i would estimate around two-thirds of the work we do caused by l thing is somebody with a phishing e-mail but there are plenty of other ways. are attacking -- >> a couple of minutes left in this program. to ill leave to go live now the brookings institution for a of the mexican u.s. relations. this is live coverage just getting understood way. c-sp [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] panel.ave a remarkable the biographies are in the program and i do not intend to repeat them. stress is the following. shared responsibility exists between the u.s. government and government. second clinton was perhaps first

enunciate that. ut since that time senior officials from washington have repeated that commitment that in mexico is also our violence and due to the fact that we are the largest market or the illicit products which move toward our border. and that our inability to southward movement cash makes this a joint enterprise. joint enterprise was very lose during the calderon administration and david johnson, who is with us this fternoon, was the director of that department within the state which managed that initiative. david, for your, joining us this afternoon.

election, a new president, and a new policy is what we are understand. the situation is dynamic, and us it is uncertain. herefore, we have asked senior official from the mexican government as well as the ambassador to the united eduardo medina-mora icaza, who is sitting here today but in the front seat of the a citizen this afternoon for the moment, to what is this lain policy.new security because if there is a shared we need to ty, the shifts that are occurring. to present and share with you the response from

we u.s. government, and await the arrival of assistant secretary alan bersin from the homeland security, because he has the border and he as the customs and the immigration in his bailiwick. i sincerely hope that snowden has not detained him somewhere and that he will at through therep in do door. i'm going to start off this asking the minister special affairs at the mexican embassy here in to present to us the mexican strategy. thank you. ville ille

> thank you very much for having us here. thank you, diana. you to everyone for being here. eduardo, it is a pleasure to you.e this with i'm sure you understand our freig reat ambassador has a great sense of humor. that is why he has me up on the stage instead of him. o, i thank you also, the ambassador, for this opportunity. president pena nieto has stated he was notonths that have a new strategy but more like a public security policy, a justice policy

has can follow up in what been done, but certainly that a general line to issues of security and justice in mexico. a more reactive approach prior to this administration. and the new approach of the and policy for security justice is to direct to roots causes of crime rather than just the consequences. in many parts of there are two preconditions for full development of a country. first one is macroeconomic study. i was 18 years old, i heard

media in he press and mexico that there was an 1994.mic crisis in and we didn't know if we should ollarize our economy because the peso was not very stable back then. debates in the media, the cafes, with the policy makers and in the press, on this issue. we did our homework and today we of the most solid economies in the world. we implemented a state policy we raised nomy and our macroeconomic stability. looking now to fulfill which isd precondition security and justice. president nieto has pointed out

do so.es of action to the first is planning. much not looking to have improvisation here but, rather, toward lanned approach this issue. the second one is, of course, prevention, social prevention of crime. the national program for the of violence and crime was already presented a few ago.hs it focuses on 57 municipalities where much crime 261 place and action in municipal it's of the more than municipalities they are restore social ae fabric and bring economic and opportunities and certainly also related to treatment. human rights, we also have made important

we have certainly as well a lot of plans. we have a new law and new human rights. for nd regarding jurisdiction we will not have more trials under jurisdiction where ing or ns are person ing ilitary personnel that is off duty is participating. important n is an factor. coordination between our agencies at the federal level, federal and state and state and municipal authorities. certainly we have divided the country in favor regions to approach from a better and from a phmore technical manner the problems of security and justice there.

privileging intelligence. years government the federal government was effectively kind of substituting the way we approach the problem, substituting the governors. because we were more -- we were having an approach where the government would just go to the states and take over the situation, take charge of the situation of the enforcement improve the y to security situation there. his is not what the constitution mandates and it certainly is not the approach right now. we are currently embracing a where the approach federal government is supporting do their work and certainly supporting also to that scheme.

and we're confident that that , and is already seeing a very positive for improving make a ation and will difference in our country. one, ifhe most important it is one that is more important than the other, is institutional transformation. in the beginning of my presentation i said we were to and codes of ots crime rather than injuries the consequences. of nd all of the problem organized crime lies winds.tional in mexico we have a very strong state. a very strong state --arding location, regarding we are among very few companies coverage.rsal health we are also very strong. programs are very good. about you in terms of security

and justice we're not yet there. need to make more regarding security and justice in our country. we need to strengthen our institutionsss -- to riar particulate -- re re-articulate our cooperation with the united states that well talk about later. line of actionst is assessment and feedback because this is something we like to enrich and assess on the process. diana has asked me to talk a bit justice progress on reform. e will make -- we have a deadline in 2016 when our system, hascriminal a quisitor iial to mo more adversarial system to

ensure due process. and to ensure the presumption of innocence, expedite trials, quality and the other you are istics that right now reading on the screen. it has been fully implemented in other states 29 are taking action to achieve its inception. it has been progress in 20 of them. e are looking to embrace an alternative justice criterion avoid or felonies to imprisoning people unnecessarily safeguarding victims. this new criminal justice system model does not include yet will ized crime but it hr include all types of crime in

the long term. regarding police and police know, we have more than 2,000 police country.ons in the this is because we have almost for every of our municipalities. there are municipalities where we don't have police corporations. it is a matter of creating critical mass the numbers are important. we need them it be reliable and effective. ut creating critical mass improves reaction, that improves the capability of them to a wider and bigger area, let's call it jurisdiction though technically it is not jurisdiction because it is a

of police.model very the same time it is important to secure peace and tranquillity for the communities in that the territory is well controlled by the police. state will assess the unicipal police forces and the state of those forces if they are required to be a single if they willate or stay municipal police forces but be reformed. certainly municipalities have public safety functions to a single command government and there is in place an initiative to create a in our olice command country. gendarmerie which has been in the media and minds who follow this

it ect very closely, essentially is a work in rogress and it is still in the planning stages. what we do know is that it will to help oyment force areas where the state is weaker. this is about territorial presence. public to recover security tasks and it will have andtary and police training structure, civilian command and duties. an addition of the federal police, constrained to electrical plan dates and power. it won't be a substitute to the police like it read somewhere. within the federal police with rules of engagement set of duties nd will start with 5,000 members. currently the federal police

elements, approximately. we have deployed sometimes more, less, around 45,000 armed elements from our armed forces. this means more or less 90,000 elements and we believe necessary to have 100,000 elements in our territory in of a federal force. the president has stated his to take the federal police force from 37,000 to elements and the gendarmerie grows to that number we would reach around 100,000 could think of the public security tasks by police military.her than the regarding international cooperation, we have had some in recent n problems

terms of cially in cooperation, intelligence cooperation and exchange. set a singlelready point of contact to exchange intelligence. this is certainly to avoid duplication of efforts regarding cooperation to increase effectiveness of government actions. importantly, to avoid competiti competition. cooperation is based on a best trend basis and the gencies in mexico and the agencies in the united states would choose mutually with whom exchange te or intelligence. this is not so and will not be kicase of for the intelligence against organized crime. we will have a single point of contact to have more coordination and organization of certainly in terms of training, technical assistance nd cooperation that will continue on a one-on-one basis.

of the new focus approach will be on money traffic g and weapons being. and not, as i said, only in consequences. this is very interesting. for fiscal budget year 2013 approved by the , let me say ess 13,505,120,831 dollars. , 1.06% of for our g.d.p. to prevent crime, fight addiction, regulation can you and response for public security of the states and federal district. does not include the .udget of every state every state is, of course,

and justi security justice. this is only at the federal level. assistant udes the provided by the federal government to the states. this into consideration nd bearing in mind the initiative the u.s. is committed , we total of $1.4 billion can certainly reach the mexico, n that regarding security and justice, $13 for every $1 hat the united states sends these matters. if we were to take into states ation what the into these, sting a would reach probably around relation of around 20 to 1 for justice that is being invested by the mexican

he ernment in comparison to t initiative. this is not assistance. this is more like a shared responsibility because it is a we need to em and seek a shared solution to this. , for us, what es putting into the initiative is very meaningful and symbolic. it provides ime -- ices and other types of well, services and equipment. we certainly training that cannot find in the market anywhere else. the is more important than money itself. it is a matter of cooperation providing training in more in kind than in cash. i know this the time is short, this is more or less of a

breakdown. i'm not sure if you can see clearly on the screen. the his is a breakdown of federal budget for the year 2013 that i just talked about. will be rmation available to diana. in brief, just to wrap up, we talking about a tpnew approach has justice institutions to the ete the deployment of state in terms of security and justice. that institutionalizes the to the problem of violence and organized crime and disrupts the ability of criminal groups to reproduce their model in time and geography. bottom line is that we are seeking to assure peace and for mexican families in their communities. 2012 to december of this of 2013 and i'm shaoure

will be gone through more thoroughly there were a total of 5, 5,296 homicides linked to organized crime. of the ast five months previous administration it was 6,000. when you compare the consecutive eriods there's been a decrease of 1,136 homicides. that stands for 18%. still too many but 18% for the irst months of the administration i think it is quite a good output. for mexico enforcing the law, it unavoidable obligation. with this i thank you very much forward to the other presentations and commentary and this.ons on thank you very much. applause]

the m now going to ask assistant secretary for international affairs of the homeland security, alan bersin, please to respond. can we turn off this power bersin.o we focus on mr. >> thank you, diana. brookings, mr. ambassador. thank you for that presentation. describe at is to lea outline, the response of the department of homeland ecurity and by extension the united states government to the transition that has taken place mexico. in the context of any ransition, whether it be mexican or in the united states, when you go from one the next thereto the tendency to emphasize

new and the different. of course, in any transition there will be changes. to this groupgest we need to step back and look at the long-term strategic place in t has taken the united states of mexico over the hrlast 12 years, certainly over the last years, and even more pronounced over the last 3 1/2 years. because i think in that long-term and that recognition long-term strategic change, we actually begin it what tand and can project is likely to happen over the , certainly neration the next decade.

frankly, the large change that see any alteration is n a fundamental shift that has taken place in the way the united states government and mexican government view problems. both at the border but also in the interior of both countries. from a history, recognizing that u.s.-mexican war in and treaty of y 1848 we have had a demilitarized unguarded border in the sense of military forces stationed on the characterizes border check points in most of the world. as with canada, the united states in its border with blessed -- s been mexico has been blessed by the we nce of armed enemies and have had a friendly relationship context of comparison to

much of the rest of the world. said, that for much of u.s. and mexican history there basically a courtesy and a emphasize the o positive but in terms of real substantive cooperation on matters of together pnd working for most of our bilateral by ory that was conspicuous its absence. it was only at the u.s.-mexican a genuine there was equality based on sovereignty. by going from one country to the next it was at the border that the asymmetry in the minimized p could be and in fact the national pride of mexico be asserted. that translated in the practical the absence of cooperation for the most part. in terms of the kind of

cooperation that i believe now d.n.a. n built into the of the relationship. unlike the past, what we now theory of action that is genuinely accepted by both governments. that theory of action is the the nition of responsibility, shared problems.ility for whereas in the past you would ave seen -- and we did hear -- with regard to the major problems separating our sources of d periodic tension, whether it be drugs or violence, here was a tendency to point fingers at one another. largelylem of migration was attributed from the u.s. side to the mexican inability to provide employment for most of its people. mexicans would point at the

united states and indicate that igration issues were largely a function of the american hypocritical desire for safe but cheap labor. with regard to narcotics we to see the same blame ga game, so to speak, with regard mexicans whyasking they could not control organized crime within their country and the transfer of drugs across the border. nd mexicans replying quite strongly that were americans not he largest consumers of narcotics in the world, perhaps supply from f mexico would be put in context. of the nd on in terms way we dealt with these issues. remarkably, remark lee and irrevocably, that has

faded from the scene. what you see is a strategic understanding on the part of the mexican and u.s. governments that these are shared problems. once there was an intellectual recognition that the problem of narcotics coming north, migrants coming north, in tons going south, and cash going south, that this was not an occasion for finger-pointing or blaming, but rather a common, a vicious cycle of criminality that , theted both countries platform for shared solutions became possible for the first time in our bilateral history. as someone who has been involved living on the border and someone who has been honored to be involved with mexican colleagues for two decades, the

change in the bilateral relationship in the last five years, the last seven years, and the last three years, with the growth and cooperation increasing with each development of relationship has been nothing short of remarkable. in thene transformation bilateral relationship based on the notion of shared recognitionty and a we must develop common approaches to these shared problems. it has revolutionized the relationship. losech so that i would not my focus on those strategic principles of cooperation as we see as will happen in any change of administration a different sovereigntyhow one chooses to organize its affairs, particularly its security affairs.

those changes, a measured, disciplined approach that has been laid out is something that will not affect, but rather i submit to you will more successfully lead to implementation of solutions to these common problems as we move forward. about would like to talk in terms of impact on the united states government are border coordination, interior cooperation, and the job i see for both nations going forward in terms of the next 10 years, work which will need to begin in the next two and then continue. with regard to the border, our shared border has always -- for those of us who live and work on the border, we have recognized the wisdom of our mexican the bordereferencing

as the third country. neither here nor there, in which a whole variety of influences whether it has to do with, culture, or family relationships, there is a blend that is less important than for those who live far from the border in mexico city and washington. the fact of the matter is the contextas been in the of our relationship even one of where force tends to derail the operation and becomes a source of contention. both governments recognize that. i believe going forward the border violence prevention protocols developed in the

bush-xt of the first willron administration lead to a development of mechanisms and modes of cooperation and communication that will put that history of incidents, each of which is a complicating factor, will not confront them by ignoring them, but rather develop the kind of mechanisms which have been absent to be able to work through the problems of any particular case. i see that as an important point going forward. as we begin to recognize the huge changes that have taken place in the mexican economy, now the 13th largest economy in the world. $1.16 trillion of gross domestic

a largerrojected to be economy and germany one generation from now, 24 b to. one generation. mexico is projected to have a larger economy and germany by the oecd. the increasing democratization of the mexican political system, more than 50% of mexicans today are firmly moving in or toward the middle class. ofs has changed the nature our border relationship consistent with president obama and president pena nieto saying and insisting we turn and look ofthe economic dimensions our economies. that gives impetus to look at

the border, not as an occasion for division but rather as a source of strength to build the competitiveness. the way in which the united states and mexico compete with east asia, the indian subcontinent, brazil, indonesia, and turkey is by lowering our labor, but on cross-border transactions. the shared production platforms that exist between the united states and mexico for automobiles and a variety of other instruments and appliances requires we make the crossing of the border sometimes in production before that automobile cross the border four or five or six terms. that requires we lower the

transaction costs and weak times. asfocus on making the border seamless a place as we can. in the three minutes i have left -- [laughter] let me turn to the interior cooperation. then the job of the next generation. it seems to me with regard to window it is the single of cooperation, with the pena nieto administration has done is organize its security affairs. the united states will work to adjust with our mexican partners, with those with whom we share responsibility, to develop the mechanisms we need to make this work where bilateral cooperation is important. every program we have described is something that will contribute to the security of

mexico and by definition there for to the security of the united states. on thet think the focus elements of transition and for actions that occur -- and the frictions that occur are productive. we are only seven months into the new administration. we're at months into the second obama administration term in the united states. onelieve we will see focus the strategic importance of the and who the new nation in the number of stores that talk about the -- and -- and less emphasis on the frictions as they subside. i would suggest for the administration's to pick up on two initiatives the pena nieto

administration has focused on. the first is the notion there is a regionalization and the need for regional cooperation looking at north america as stretching from columbia to new york. mexico will play an increasing role in leadership with regard to central america and the problems that have arisen in central america. the united states welcomes that leadership and looks to cooperate with mexico in meeting it. the second is the -- to cooperate as we are asked to do with regard to the southern border of mexico, the border belize andes -- guatemala. mexico controls organized crime, we see the impact in central america.

the strengthening of the border infrastructure in the south of mexico is a project with which i think you will see significant cooperation. lastly, the job for the next 10 years and over the next generation is to institutionalize the work we have established bilaterally. we need to build institutions. the most successful institution in terms of the u.s.-mexican relationship that is ongoing is suchbwc that deals with three matters as boundaries and waters. that was not always the case in u.s.-mexican relationship. if you go back to the 19th century, water and boundaries were a big source of contention. now it is a matter of technical adjustment. in a particular boundary, is referred to the ibwc and handled.

water issues are dealt with as technical issues. i look forward to the day when the issues that take up so much of our time on the border have been reduced to technical matters in the u.s. and mexican people focus on the job of economic competitiveness, prosperity for both of our peoples, all of our peoples in a new relationship, the seeds of which are clearly sprouting now invisible to those who will look. thank you very much. [applause] >> now we will get the private security point of view. i have some slides. i brought some slides. first of all, it is a pleasure to be part of a dialogue with

such a distinguished panel. themain reason i am here is publication of this book by the brookings institution in which i contribute with a security chapter. thank you, diana, for your diligence and meticulous work that improved the chapter. the press andate mr. bersin and ambassador medina-mora icaza, one of the and knowledgeable of the security situation in mexico. he has been the head of the intelligence agency in mexico,

the administrator of public security, and also attorney general. he has an exceptional career in the securities sector. recounting some of the main findings are described in the security chapter of the book about organized crime and violence in mexico. next, i will point out some salient features of the current crime-pe of organized related violence in mexico and 'sme of president pena nieto security policies. from 2008 until 2010, homicide rates throughout mexico spiked. in 2008, homicide rates increased by 50% and another 50% in 2009. this sharp increase in violence

is toxic. .t was a sudden change pr it reversed the downward trend in violence which dates back to the 1990's. a central idea which i discussed is that the federal government security strategy resulted in unprecedented capture of drug organization leaders. that is one of the factors that led to the violence crisis. the decapitation of criminal organizations was non-selective. all major cartels were targeted, despite the fact they did not engage in violence and predatory crimes with equal intensity. thus, the post different threat thels to the mexican people impact of these captures was not

fosterr violence but to uncertainty and instability within organizations which operate on the basis of personal reputation. the hypothesis has been highly contested in mexico, factors from the government strategy may have contributed to triggering violence. however, i have not come across any other compelling explanation for the dramatic increase in violence that started in 2008. high-noteworthy that most profile captures were performed on the basis of information provided by the u.s. government. thus, the mexican government had only a limited ability to implement a strategy more attuned to domestic interests. an important consequence of widespread violence was the

parallel increase in extortion, which was recorded by both official statistics and victimization surveys. forence promoted a demand what is called the legal protection. mafia organizations appeared in several regions. others may operate through a contact network. mafia usually deployed large groups of gunmen and may even have support from rogue sectors .f the population much of the violence we currently face in mexico is not fuel by drug-trafficking or other criminal activities, but by conflicts between local or their enforcers.

2011, the federal government shifted from a non-selective to a selective strategy. it specifically targeted the most violent among mexican large drug trafficking organizations. this shift in the federal government's strategy may have provided an important incentive for other criminal organizations to use less violent methods. thereafter, organized crime- alated violence initiated downward trend. it is too soon to assess the new government's strategy. as you can see, i will show you some graphs. as you can see, violence in mexico has had a steady downward trend since mid-2011.

these are quarterly periods during the last years. violence declined during the first six months of the administration of pena nieto. graph. myograph m --y the data i used is collected by my team in the consultant firm in mexico city. we collected on a daily basis, information about homicides related to organized crime from sources, mainly newspapers, a lot from the national newspapers. we have a reduction if we compare the last semester of

calderon with the first semester of pena nieto of 9.2%. the states that have registered the larger violence reductions are the following. guerrero with an important variation. what is important about this is all of these states registered very high levels of violence during the calderon government. this is the graph for the evolution of violence in the metropolitan area. there is a notorious reduction in violence during the last months.

states, there are other that are registering increases in violence. and others.puebla mediumtates registered or low levels of violence during calderon. is violence is moving from high-intensity violence areas to were previously low intensity violence areas. here you have the graph for

guadalajara. in my opinion, it is the most important case. it is important metropolitan area in mexico. the graph for the mexico city metropolitan area. this includes the capital of mexico, not only the federal district. landscape of violence in mexico is mixed. there is a national decline of violence. if we look at the data, the state data, there are some places where violence is still increasing. why has violence decreased in mexico during the last trade of years -- two years?

i think there are four factors. the first has to do with the federal government shift from a non-elected to a selective law- enforcement strategy. the second factor has to do with an increasing social demand to put a stop to violence. there are broad social movements in mexico demanding the government stop violence. the third factor is more effective interventions by the federal government and some state governments. without any doubt, there has been institutional learning during the last years. now the state governments and the federal government are more effective to intervene in certain violent areas. there is reduced availability of new recruits.

gangs thatbanks -- were previously recruited by the cartels now refuse to have these links because they know the great risk it represents to collaborate with the cartels. regarding pena nieto's strategy, the most noticeable change so far has taken place in the government's communications strategy. spent inhave been nonstop propaganda about captures and joint operations which were the trademark of the previous administration. overall, this change has been .ositive

providing little information could be harmful. especially in areas where they are stronger. the presence of an absence they may contribute to business migration or to the parents. the appearance -- the appearance of groups that already exist in certain areas. the government has also engaged in a national program to prevent violence through social interventions. iferventions of this type they are targeted have a large potential in mexico in the long term. it will be critical to their success to establish a clear distinction between general policies and violence prevention strategies. on the other hand, i believe we need a stronger emphasis on law

enforcement strategies aimed at reducing violence through deterrence. i describe alternatives to such policies in my chapter of the book. ofortunately, the ability mexican law enforcement institutions to implement such policies is still very limited. it could contribute to overcoming these limitations. however, little information has been disclosed about the specifics of this. moreover, it is a deterrent to strengthen domestic intelligence collection at all government levels. as long as mexican high-profile law enforcement relies on u.s. sources, it will not be possible to implement timely and effective violence reduction interventions. thank you. [applause]

you very much. this is the moment when we ambassador moutsatsos to comment. -- ambassador medina-mora icaza to comment. >> thank you very much. i am an ordinary citizen. ambassadorntal because i am a political appointee and not a career ambassador. when my term or function as ambassador to the u.s. ends, i will no longer be an ambassador, and just a human being an ordinary citizen. thank you for inviting me. i want to recognize my dear friend alan bersin, perhaps no one more knowledgeable of the border than he, who has lived,

worked there and suffer the consequences of being on the border and planning and working together with his mexican counterparts. david and i worked together also. , the currentiefly administration is adjusting the strategies. it is adjusting the strategy at the same time with adjusting the narrative. this is important because we have learned from our own mistakes and from our successes. we have learned from other countries mistakes and successes. if any organization, government, company, or business concern wants to stay successful in the market, you have to adjust your strategy. is most important component

security in the basic obligation of the state. this is what the state is for, to provide ordinary citizens with certainty with regard to their safety and the to share their talents in their communities and with their families. in this sense, president pena administration has a new architecture and a rate. -- array. is focusing on reorganize and the focus ofing principlesnder the of responsibility and coordination. maybe we have

devoted to much effort into the federal build up of security and too little on the states. maybe we left the states outside of the equation. this was proven a mistake in the sense it did not provide the results we were looking for. in this sense, at the federal level, the president has delegated the strategy implementation to his home secretary, the ministry of the interior, for everyday task management. this provides for better coordination within the federal agencies. the secretary of the interior has on its own a very strong responsibility on this because the -- he is the head of the cabinet. he also serves as the national security council executive secretary and takes the role of

the president when the president is not present. he also president, heads the national security council that gathers the governors, federal institutions, and civil society public policyg around public security. the secretary of the interior has a large role by legal mandate. it is for him to actually carry out the everyday tasks of management and coordination. with the better combination in federal agencies, the interior ministry is also responsible for carrying the relationship of the federation with the state governments, the legislative branch, and the judicial. this is his role according to the constitution.

problem inolitical the sense you have to efforts and responsibilities and mandates of the federal government and state governments with congress and the judiciary tound the basic objective provide mexican citizens and their families with certainty. , to provide them with the opportunity to live in peace and tranquillity with their families in their communities. this has provided the space for much better coordination between the federal government and the states. it is helping the states to build up their own security institutions, particularly the and justice institutions. with the national

to go for what is mandated by the constitution and has to be in place by 2016. president pena has agreed with the governors will not change the date. we will move faster in terms of implementation of this justice .ystem major reform we cannot leave the governors outside this equation. we have to provide them with the support and help them to build up their own state institutions so we have better coordination and shared responsibility. towardthen move forward having a better result with the strategy. cooperation comes

from this better arrangement of the national institutions around this objective. from the narrative we have developed in the past, we were maybe being seen as using the u.s. as a scapegoat of our own issues. of course, the u.s. is to be blamed for what it is to be blamed. this is common in mexico from institutional weakness. , this is at the center of the new narrative, our main problem is not drug- trafficking. our main problem is security. the inability of the state to provide security to its own citizens in the territory. drug-trafficking makes it much worse because it gives the criminal concerns tremendous

economic power and firepower that threatens ordinary citizens across the board and buildingobstacles to of a more sound institutional framework. the basic approach is to build up the security institutions that mexico requires and that mexican citizens are entitled to. in this sense, i would say cooperation between the federal government and the states, the cooperation between mexico and the u.s. is essentially based on providing the best of our resources and abilities to this institution a bill that effort -- institutional buildup in to providelow security to its citizens. the mexican government has no confusion.

we have moved away from the narrative of only focusing on increasing arrests were fighting drug trafficking. there is no confusion or conflict between the new approach which is also based on and law enforcement activities which are more targeted geographically and group-based in terms of the source of violence but also in shared responsibility on the basis of international corporation, particularly with the united states of america and law-enforcement agencies in the u.s. this is a shared problem in the anse it has to be seen as bilateral change for drug- trafficking. we have to take actions in every

element. we have to see our main responsibility and job is to build up sound institutions in to make the mexican thee able to provide certainty it is obliged to give to its own citizenship. thank you they much. certainly, i am willing to participate in the discussion. [applause] to invite the speakers to, -- to come up. we have kept you for over an hour. i would now like to open this to

the floor for questions and answers, asking that you identify your name and affiliation, and please wait for a microphone because this is still in been -- this is still being recorded by c-span. there are a number of questions. let's take three and then the next round. mexican international student in the states. dialogue wein this have been hearing we have been hearing issues about the violence and solve insecurity in my country, there is in my belief and aspect we have not yet talked about. what is popularly

believed to be the single bullet, the thing that would solve the issue. legalization of narcotics. >> can we keep to a question? there are many people waiting behind you. if there is legalization, who will regulate it? willoughby the government or corporations or another party? >> thank you. the gentleman behind. the am a professor at school of international service at american university. i am currently working on a three-year project concerning obstacles of cooperation between mexican and american law- enforcement agencies to combat mexican-based organized crime. during a recent visit to mexico march, two separate

high-level mexican officials -- i cannot give their names -- described america with the following words. is that america was an example of u.s. penetration and raising the, really issue of internal political fighting that might continue to this day regarding the nature of merita and how it is to be perceived. i wanted any comment on that. >> thank you. ambassador? i am a retired u.s. deployment -- diplomat and a

friend of mexico forever. before i throw out my question, i want to say to the ambassador that whether you are a political appointee or career, you are an ambassador for ever. your excellency for ever. i will always call you mr. ambassador. assistantn is for the secretary. i have sounded off before that it is our fault with the consumers of drugs. our institutions are the minor -- money launderers of the profits. we love our guns. i love my gun. what are you doing to shut down the millions of bucket shops along the frontier that are illegally against u.s., mexico, international law? to shut down this trafficking of

illegal weapons? >> i am going to ask the panel to address this. would yousatsos, .ddress the question of merita you address the legalization question? ambassador, your question is already directed to you. ariel. initiative, since you do not need resources, i will take the liberty of reading these concepts on the initiative. the initiative is an agreement for cooperation between the united states and mexico, as we

already know. it is not only based on no enforcement, which is what i take from your question. onis not only based equipment. it also includes building capabilities come institutional transformation in mexico. it also deals with preventive measures in both countries. this is a good moment to tell you that never before in our , president pena nieto's strategy has been aligned with the united states strategy regarding drug policy. the office of national drug control of the white house released a few months after president pena nieto's release

of our own strategy the 2013 as -- the 2013 strategy ont has a similar approach prevention and restoring the social fabric, rebuilding communities. it certainly has more focused on health because this is a country where consumption is higher. conceptually, they are both very much alike. they are very similar. i think this is a great to reticulate bilateral corporation to profit or benefit from this new alignment of approaches to the problem. being infiltration or penetration of the united states

as you stated. is there a silver bullet? if so, is it legalization? >> i do not think this is the political moment for legalization in mexico. also for the united states, i do not see the political viability of this initiative. , violence in drugs generated by gangs in mexico city and other parts of the country because of drugs. more isneed in mexico to have some intelligent measures to disrupt markets.

we have to do that in the .ourist cities also in mexico city. the situation in mexico city is worse. we have to disrupt these markets. that would be my proposal. >> thank you. alan bersin. >> mr. ambassador, your passion is shared by many. often the world is not constructed to permit solutions a particular point in time. that does not mean there will not come a time when the legal framework makes a more concerted is toch to the problem just more viable. i will say in keeping with the

doctrine of shared on criminality that more has been done with regard to the southbound traffic than had previously been the case. the obama administration's position with regard to certain changes in the gun lawa is a matter of public record. in the the fabric relationship between the united states and mexico is we recognize there are conditions in each of our countries that make certain things less likely than other things. in the past, that was the occasion for conflict and dissension. part of the genuine respect that exists between government officials and the peoples of these two nations.

>> i would like to take the next round from the back of the audience. there is a lady with her hand up. your question? you.ank thank you for the interesting presentation. there has been talk that the affectsto strategy central america. i hear in many circles in the united states as well as in how does this objective under pena nieto and of the u.s. coincide today?

central america had its main goal to dismantle criminal organizations and drug trafficking organizations. now the goal of the mexican government is to reduce violence. understand ifs they coincide if it is the same dismantle criminal organizations? >> the gentleman near the camera in the middle of the room. >> i am with the mexican news agency. the obama administration has said the border is more secure than ever. however the senate is voting on fornion -- on an amendment additional border patrol agents and resources to fund the completion of 700 miles of fences, and new walls on the

border. kind of u.s. need those resources and manpower? >> the final question from the back. there is a lady in the middle on your left. recognizing for not you. i need glasses. given the security situation in the last few months and the decision of this government to send the military and federal how wouldthat state, you distinguish what this government is doing compared to what the former president did in the same state in december of 2006? eduardo, if you would address

the third question. it is interesting. she is focusing everywhere. , i am thankful. it is a good idea to be thankful. thank you, patricia. let me tell you something. initiative is not mainly focused on what you just mentioned. criminalption of organizations, what you stated, the institutional position of the rule of law, construction of the 21st century border, and development of strong communities that can meet pressure from criminal organizations. theng said that,

difference -- you asked more how they objectives, coincide. what i have just stated regarding both better coinciding, there is an important difference and opportunity. it is called a holistic approach. before we did not have a holistic approach. mexico, at least not something we could identify as actionable. certainly not very much in the united states. this is the first time the focusing onroach the cause of crime rather than

consequences is implemented in both countries. neither can be considered as part of our bilateral cooperation approach but not as the only one. things we can work on. i think this presents a unique first time opportunity to align between both countries our efforts of bilateral cooperation and attacked this problem in its roots and its cause. i do not know if i am answering what i understood from the question. thank you. >> ambassador, the border. me anhe continues to call ambassador, i will have to be diplomatic and not answer questions. [laughter] this monumental piece of game

changing legislation from the beginning has involved three elements the president has made clear in his statements from the white house and the so-called gang of eight has articulated from the beginning. there are three major dimensions. the first is border security. the second is a path to regularized status for the 11 million estimated persons who lack the status at this point. the third is to effect a system that would demagnetize the job market in terms of the of legal migration to this country. when dealing with a massive transformation framework of the kind we are discussing, there will be differences of views as to how each of those elements should best be dealt with.

oft is what the substance the discussion that is going on in the senate is today about. i would note that while people will disagree about specific elements, if there is to the immigration reform which the president is supporting and many senators from both parties and many congressmen from both parties will support, the debate over any of those elements will be had. the important thing in a democratic society is that there be sufficient consensus reached such that the larger transformation legislatively occurs. continues, people will feel differently about any one of those elements and many

other dimensions. as secretary napolitano said, she supports the concept of border security and recognizes there are many ways to supplement and strengthen it. now underthe proposal consideration. >> how i think we have put you in a very hot seat. perhaps to give a different answer without the press here. i am not an ambassador. >>, at my own game. >> it is one of the most troubling states as far as because it mexico combines two factors. haveriminal organizations

a social basis. --re is also institutional the institutions are weak. the police institutions, etc. that situation has given place organization of these police better trying hard , theotect the communities systematic attacks of the criminal organizations that are always trying to extract money by extortion from these communities. in the last weeks, what has happened is that some criminal organizations simulate to the community police. perform theing to work with this false appearance

of community police. the great challenge of the government, the federal government, is to distinguish between the authentic community police and the ones that are criminal organizations that simulate to the community police. >> thank you. we have time for one. ground. -- for one quick round. please ask short questions. the lady and the final gentleman. my name is christina. ok. i study international relations in mexico. the problem of security shared by mexico and the united states is also shared by central america. how should the two governments address the problem in central america? what is the responsibility they

have? >> thank you very much, christina. yes. >> i am currently a student at harvard university. my question goes back to legalization. a lot of times when a solution like legalization is broached, the answer given by many is it is not politically viable. is it that it is not politically viable or do you think it is not an effective solution? >> thank you. finally, my fellow author in this book, christopher wilson. >> thank you for the event you have put together. >> you have to tell the audience who you are and where you come from. >> christopher wilson with the wilson center. i appreciate the focus given to

the importance of the coordination between the federal and state governments throughout mexico. i think that is an important piece of any strategy going forward. what is the best way for the federal government to be able to interact, especially with the weaker states in mexico? there is a broad range of capacities from the federal district to some of the states we have been talking about. what can the federal government do to improve the capacity of some of the more challenged states, challenged by organized crime and their own ability to build up institutions for the rule of law? >> alan bersin, i will let you off the hook for this round. time to address legalization. eduardo to do the final question about the states. i will take the central american answers. i have also just published a book about central america. both the mexican and u.s.

government recognize these small, weak, but democratic states face a great challenge from criminal organizations. they are too small, their budgets are too little, and they do not have the capacity on their own to fight trans- national criminal organizations. honduras is swamped by drug- traffickers moving it will take the stuff, what ever it is on to the next stage. alone they will suffer. more homicides, more extortion. we have both the intelligence gathering capacity