emergency room, i can help with that. [laughter] if it's not broken, don't fix it. >> >> thank you, tom. my purpose is to warm up for tom, not to pick up after he left off. it is great to be here. i am joining the delegation for years and years -- thank you for being here, leader pelosi. we are making this happen -- without your help this would never have happened. we have so many people and all of you are here because you are community leaders. apart from networks, with access to other individuals and businesses and people, there are other community leaders. we need your help to get the word out. i have 40,000 people in my district without health insurance. we have to make sure that we are working hand-in-hand to pick that up. this has happened so quickly, we

are just giving out materials and many other language materials are lacking because of that. we need your help if you are covering communities that don't speak english. if this is going to the community clinics, small businesses or any of the different areas where these communities congregate. what we will do in october is have many enrollments fairs, asking for your help to bring people into the system. this is what we are focused on right now and we are asking you for help. we need your help to make sure that everyone you can think about their who needs this service and wants the service has this. we have that window from october to march where they can enroll. because things are moving so quick we, we need your help.

please work with cover california, and thank you so much for your efforts. >> thank you. >> i wanted to recognize the supervisor david campos is here. from the city of san francisco. thank you. >> with that, we will close the town hall but i want to close that with the thanks to the leaders and those of you who joined us by being partners and asking questions, engaging with us, you are part of history. thank you, come to coverageca.com and you can like us on facebook. [applause] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] this morning on a sunday talk shows, rand paul talked about

usaid to egypt. look.s a [video clip] egypt is more to likely to buy a lavish chateau for a dichter are general in paris than it is to buy bread for people in cairo. we are not winning the hearts and minds of those in egypt. our aid a something that goes to the dictators and despots that have been taking away their rights for generations. they see it stolen. mubarak stole it by the billions of had fancy homes all over the world with our money. it has to end. it is counterproductive. those who want to continue to overprotecting american weakness because it

shows we are so weak we will not even adhere to our own conditions on this aid. it is modern modulating behavior. the egyptians keep doing the same thing. they roll tanks over protesters, this is not something most americans would support. think it is it time for us to recalibrate and look at, what is our national interest. there is no question that we overestimated what our leverage was. we have underestimated the leverage the saudi arabia and uae has had on this government. >> let me stop you there. you have switched your position. you'd believe it is necessary to suspend aid? >> yes, but let me talk about that. we need to look at the tiers of our aid. most of the aid is already gone out the door this year. we are talking about the debate will take place this fall.

i think this whole discussion has been a little bit naive, and very shallow. need to be looking at what is in our national interest. tomorrow on the c-span networks, the air force association hosts a discussion on military defense strategies and planning during a time of tightening budgets. live at 9:30 a.m. eastern. the new america foundation examines electronic surveillance and human rights with access now, an organization that focuses on individual's access to the internet and their right to privacy. that is live at 6:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. former secretary of state clinton clinton speaking about voting rights, and u.s. supreme court's decision to strike down part of the voting rights act. she she accepted the american bar association's ada metal -- in the causevice

of american justice. from san francisco, this is 35 minutes. [applause] >> thank you, thank you very much. thank you all very much. thank you. [applause] thank you very much. thank you, mr. bellows, mr. chairman, members of the house of delegates, incoming president, friends and colleagues, long time members of the aba. i am so deeply grateful to you for this award. i am humbled by those who have received it in the past.

to join their company, and in some small measure, to continue the work that the aba has championed. i know that earlier you're from you heard from attorney general holder about important issues in our criminal justice system, and this afternoon, i want to raise another such issue -- voting rights. another area where the aba has been active all of my professional life. to share some perspectives from four decades as a lawyer, a legislator, diplomat about why voting rights are so foundational to our democracy and our future. but first, i want to underscore that this honor from the american bar association means so much to me because i know the work that the aba does.

it is hard to believe that it has been 25 years since then aba president robert mccreight called me in my office in little rock and suggested that i chair the first commission on women in the profession. he was very persuasive. we held hearing after hearing, recording the experiences of women lawyers, judges, and professors. in fact, a number of my colleagues from that first commission are here with us this afternoon. no one at the aba's ever suggested that we ever is back, -- that we hold back, go slow, avoid the hard truths. i am proud that the aba helped start the movement for gender equality in the legal profession. and that it continues to be at the forefront today with

initiatives to ensure that equal work really does mean equal pay. i want to applaud president and fellows leadership in combating human trafficking at home and abroad. so many other issues where america's lawyers can and should lead the way. i am well aware, as you are, that some people -- hard to believe -- see lawyers as part of the problem in our society, but i learned very early on that lawyers are often a central to the central to- -- essential to the solution to any problem we face. as secretary of state, i saw the contributions that the aba makes around the world. your rule of law initiatives is helping to improve governance, deliver justice, and promote human rights in more than 60 countries. a few years ago, i had the chance to visit members of the azerbaijan women's bar association, who were fighting domestic violence, child marriage, and other abuses in

the country without a strong tradition of the rule of law or a vibrant society, the aba's support made an enormous difference to these women. the world justice project, launched by former aba president bill newcome, has developed a rule of law index, which i found very helpful. it measures governments around the world based on for universal principles -- first, that governments, peoples, and corporations should all be accountable under the law -- second, that laws must be clear, publicized, stable, and just -- third, that laws are enacted and enforced fairly and efficiently and forth, diverse, competent, and independent lawyers and judges deliver justice under the law.

these are a essential concepts for any healthy democracy, including our own. although we use the term rule of law, it is not only about how law governs society, but also how law serves society. i mean this in at least two ways. first, that law can be an instrument for improving people's lives in addition to adjudicating their disputes and shaping their government. second, that the law belongs to the people, that its power flows from their consent and participation. this is about making the law a real and vibrant, as opposed to arid and abstract. it is also about ensuring while the law should never privilege the rights of some citizens over those of others, we should not be afraid to privilege justice over injustice.

as i witnessed as secretary of state over four tumultuous years the search for justice drives people to stand up against dictatorships, corruption, and oppression, and the rule of law is most powerful tool in human history to deliver this justice. as a young law student, i volunteered at the new haven legal assistance association. although the work i did there sometimes felt one million miles away from the classroom where we debated precedents and procedures, it helped me see lawyers giving life to the concepts in my textbooks, using them to solve real problems, facing people every day, and it inspired me to later take a job as the first director of the university of arkansas school of law's legal clinic in fayetteville, ark..

while there, i provided assistance to poor families and prison inmates. not everyone at that time thought this was an appropriate use of the law. i remember there was one judge in particular, and maybe some arkansas members will remember or have appeared before him, judge butt, who insisted my students qualify their indigent clients under a 19th-century statute that permitted free legal assistance only when a person's assets were worth no more than $10 and the clothes on his or her back. i told the judge, that was an impossible standard for anyone to meet who owned an old car or even a television or anything else worth more than $10, but he held firm. so i went to the arkansas bar association, and argued that the law should be changed. how could we deny legal assistance when it could help save hungry children from

poverty or protect battered women from abuse or stop unscrupulous bosses from exploiting their workers? the judge made his case, and the state bar association's executive committee listened to our arguments and then endorsed repealing the statute. later president carter appointed me to the legal services corporation, one of the great honors of my life. once again, there were skeptics. we had to convince congress that using the law to help poor families was just and necessary cause. it was worth it. we tripled our funding. we were able to pay thousands of lawyers to work on behalf of more than one million poor clients. we helped families avoid eviction, fight discrimination, receive their earned federal benefits. often in those days and many times since, i thought of

something that eleanor roosevelt said about human rights. she reminded us that they begin in small places close to home, in neighborhoods, schools, factories, and farms, and there is no better tool to expand and enforce human rights than the law. we can and should use it to help more people in more places live up to their god-given potential. the law, after all, belongs to the people, not the other way around. it is no accident that the first words of our constitution are "we the people." our nation was founded on the idea that power derives from public consent, not divine right or force of arms or discriminatory dictate. as justice sandra day o'connor put it, what was revolutionary when it was written and what continues to inspire the world today is that the constitution put governance into the hands of

the people. this is the basis for america's social compact, and while we may and certainly will debate amongst ourselves about the role and size of government, americans of every party and stripe cherished government of the people, by the people, and for the people. yet you know better than most that it is easy to say it. here is where it gets trickier. if people are truly to own the law under which they live, they must have the access and information to understand those laws to participate and have confidence in their government and benefit from its policies. despite our founding principles and the many ways our constitution has protected individual liberties, we do -- let's admit it -- have a history of shutting people out. african-americans, women, gays and lesbians, people with

disabilities, and throughout our history, we have found too many ways to divide and exclude people from their ownership of the law and protection under the law. one of the first jobs i had after law school was with the children's defense fund. another pioneering lawyer, mary wright aleman, wanted to find out why a school enrollment figure were so much lower than the census of school-aged children would have suggested. as part of the nationwide survey, i went door to door in new bedford, massachusetts, asking whether the family had any children not in school today -- school. we discovered that children staying home to care for younger siblings while parents worked or even dropping out to work themselves in order to support their families. we mostly found kids with disabilities who were not attending school. we found blind and deaf

children, children in wheelchairs, children with developmental disabilities, children whose families cannot afford the treatment they needed. i remember meeting a girl in a wheelchair on the small back porch of her house where we sat and talked under the grape arbor. she so wanted to go to school, but like many, she was excluded because at that time, the public schools could not or would not accommodate children like her. along with many partners across our country, we collected the data, and we brought to washington. congress eventually enacted legislation declaring that every child in our country is entitled to an education, including those with disabilities. the struggle to bring people inside, to give them real ownership of the law, is as old as our republic. this summer, we are marking the

50th anniversary of dr. king's march on washington. the 165th anniversary of the seneca falls convention. signposts on our long march to a more perfect union, and occasions to celebrate the progress we have made. this is also a time to refocus on the remaining challenges. confidence in most of our important institutions has fallen to historic lows, even as our need for solid footing in a rapidly changing world has never been greater. skepticism of authority has been part of our national character since the pilgrims, and complaining about government is a treasured american pastime. but it is troubling that many americans continue to lose faith and trust in the press, in banks, and sports heroes, and the clergy, just about every institution. according to data from the pew research center, majorities across all partisan and

demographic groups expressed little or no trust in washington. stop and think about that for a minute. one of the observations that i have made traveling the world over on behalf of our country is how rare trust is, yet trust is the thread that weaves together the social fabric that enables democracy to exist. when citizens are alienated from their government, democracy suffers. around the world in recent years, we have seen what can happen when trust unravels and societies pull apart. in the middle east, of course, but we have also seen growing middle classes in places like brazil, turkey, india, china demand more accountability and transparency from their governments. america is the strongest and oldest democracy, and we remain a beacon of liberty and opportunity, and nothing made me

prouder than representing our values these last four years. yet many americans are asking, how do we ensure that the law continues to serve and belong to the people in a time when ideology and gridlock have paralyzed our politics? when the advance of technology and the dangers of terrorism have complicated efforts to balance our desire for liberty with our need for security? when old demons of discrimination have taken on insidious new forms? these are all challenges not just to our society, not just to our government, but to our legal system. they are strains on our social compact. i am convinced that they are tests we can meet. over the coming months, i will deliver a series of speeches focused on questions like these. today, the assault on voting rights, which threatens to block millions of americans from fully

participating in our democracy and further eroding public trust. next month at the national constitution center in philadelphia, i will talk about the balance and transparency necessary in our national security policies as we move beyond a decade of wars to face new threats. later in the fall, i will address the implications of these issues for america's global leadership and our moral standing around the world. let me turn to the right to vote, because choosing our leaders is among the most direct and tangible ways in which citizens exercise their ownership over the law. it is at the heart of america's democratic experiment. i know this is an issue more often addressed by secretaries of state in places like florida or ohio and elsewhere, as secretary of state for our nation, i saw firsthand that how we protect our freedoms here at home gives us the standing and

experience necessary to defend human rights, democracy, and freedom abroad. i spent a lot of time over the past four years in countries that are trying to learn how to make democracy work. they need models to learn from. i was proud that they most often looked to the united states. in burma, i talked for hours with generals who had taken off their uniforms and were trying to learn how to become legislators. and with dissidents like aung san suu kyi who were attempting to move from protest to politics. one burmese leader of the parliament said to me, we have been studying america and trying to understand how to run the parliament. i asked if they had had seminars or workshops. no, he said, we have been watching "the west wing." [laughter] you never know. i saw time and time again,

people risking their lives for the right to vote. i'm sure you remember the famous ink stained fingers in iraq and afghanistan, the long lines in south africa. we have also seen autocrats take over the rights of their citizens. in iran in 2009, the mullahs were caught by surprise and had to results first to fraud and then to force. in russia, vladimir putin actually accused me of personally engineering the massive protests that followed the controversial parliamentary elections of 2011. americans have had to fight to safeguard and extend the right to vote as well. when i was growing up in illinois, the youth minister from our church took a few of us into chicago on a cold january night to hear dr. martin luther king speak. afterwards, i stood in a long line to shake his hand and thank him for his work. i was a senior in high school in

march of 1965, sitting in front of our black-and-white television set, when president johnson made his historical call for passage of the voting rights act. his first words were, "i speak tonight for the dignity of man and the destiny of democracy." in 1972, the democratic national committee sent me to register eligible voters in the rio grande valley in texas. some of the people were understandably wary of a blonde girl from chicago who do not speak a word of spanish, or texan for that matter. [laughter] but the law belonged to them as much as to me. they wanted to vote. we have made real progress since those days. but we still have deep flaws in our electoral system. between one quarter and a third of all eligible americans remain unregistered and therefore unable to participate. compare that to canada, our

neighbor, where most citizens are registered automatically to vote when they turn 18. i held a forum in cleveland after the 2004 election with my friend, the late congresswoman stephanie jones. there were reports of african- americans waiting in line to vote for 10 hours while whites in affluent precincts next-door waited 10 minutes. african-americans received flyers telling them the wrong times and days to vote. students from kenyon college old -- told they had to wait half a day to cast their votes. they were registered. they were eager to vote. the machines were allocated in a way that ensured young people would face long lines. in the years since, we have seen a sweeping effort across our country to obstruct new obstacles to voting. often undercover of addressing a phantom epidemic of election

fraud. like when the attorney general of south carolina justified on harsh new voter id law by declaring that "we know for a fact that the identities of many --ad people had been used or for fraudulent voting," a claim soundly rejected by a subsequent state investigation. in 2013, so far, more than 80 bills restricting voting rights have been introduced in 31 states. not every obstacle is related to raise, but anyone who says that is related to race, but anyone who says that racial discrimination is no longer a problem in american elections must not be paying attention. despite the best efforts of many well-intentioned election officials, discrepancies and resources across precincts and polling stations still disproportionately impact african-americans, latino, and young voters. that is why the voting rights act, especially its requirement that jurisdictions with a history of discrimination preclear changes in their

election procedures, has played such an important role for half a century. in the past 15 years, under both democratic and republican presidents, the department of justice has used the law to block nearly 90 discriminatory changes to state and local election rules. many more were withdrawn under scrutiny. just since congress reauthorized the voting rights act in 2006, more than 30 proposed changes have been stopped. as you know, the supreme court recently struck at the heart of the voting rights act and stripped out the preclearance formula that made it so effective. some take the effectiveness of the voting rights act to say that discrimination is a thing of the past. as justice ginsburg said, that is like throwing away your umbrella in a rainstorm because you are not getting wet. you will soon be soaked. sure enough, in the weeks since the ruling, we have seen an --seemly rush by previous to

previously covered jurisdictions to enact laws that will make it harder for millions of our fellow americans to vote. texas hurried to move forward with an id law that a federal court already invalidated. by the way, it would allow a concealed weapons permit as a valid form of identification, but not a student id from the state university. that certainly seems to violate the spirit of the supreme court's 1979 ruling which protects the voting rights of college students. florida is restarting a purge of the voter rolls that is likely to disproportionately affect minority voters and bring back memories of the 2000 election and the scores of wrongly disenfranchised voters. last year, state officials to up -- drew up a list of 182,000 voters they suspect it to be noncitizens. further investigation determined that only a fraction of a fraction of 1% were actually ineligible. legislators in north carolina pushed through a bill that reads like the greatest hits of voter suppression.

restricted early voting, no more same-day registration, extended voting hours to accommodate long lines, stricter photo id requirements that disqualify those issued by colleges or public assistance agencies, and it goes on and on. these are all changes that would have required federal approval under the voting rights act, but now can go forward without scrutiny. by invalidating preclearance, the supreme court has shifted the burden back onto citizens facing discrimination, and those lawyers willing to stand with them. while these high-profile state laws get most of the attention, we should remember that a lot of the damage will occur below the radar at the local level. that is where the voting rights act was so important, in the small places close to home.

so many potentially discriminatory changes do not require legislation or public debate. shifting poll locations and election dates, scrapping language assistance for non- english speakers without preclearance, nobody outside the local community is likely to ever hear about them, let alone have a chance to challenge them. quick examples, in 2001, a small-town tried to cancel elections after black citizens became a majority of registered voters. an election was held and the first african american mayor was elected. in charleston county, south carolina, after african-american candidates won a majority on the school board for the first time ever in 2003, county leaders attempted to resurrect voting procedures nearly identical to those that had been found to violate the voting rights act. once again, the department of justice was able to stop the change.

in 2007 the texas legislature amended the eligibility requirements for supervisors of water district so that only landowners could serve. the department of justice blocked enforcement of the new rules, noting they were -- they would disqualify a number of incumbent hispanic supervisors and there was a significant us wordy -- disparity in rates between eight and minorities. -- disparity in land ownership rates between whites and minorities. unless the hole open up by the ruling is fixed, future cases will end very differently. citizens will be victimized by the law and disenfranchised and that progress toward a more perfect union will go backwards instead of forward. what can we do and why am i talking to you, the members of the house of delegates? about what can happen and what you can do? i think we need an approach that moves on multiple fronts at once. stepped up enforcement by the department of justice, new legislation from congress, and grassroots action by citizens

and lawyers across our country. as attorney general holder is doing, the department can undo discriminatory election changes. the department can build a new list for clearance. based on recent abuses. that would be easier and more effective if congress shifts the standard for bringing jurisdiction under oversight to one of discriminatory effect. it might make sense to allow citizens and civil rights organizations and lawyers to trigger federal scrutiny of problematic practices by filing a simple one-page complaint rather than a full lawsuit. that would also require an act of congress. second congress should move to pass legislation to replace those portions of the act that the court struck down. i was in the senate and 2006 1

we unanimously reauthorized the law. after what justice ginsburg described as a deliberate evidence gathering process. reports documented continued discrimination. after testimony from expert witnesses, documents of discrimination,more than 15,000 pages of legislative record. the republican chairman called it one of the most extensive considerations of any piece of legislation and its nearly 30 years of service. after an overwhelming bipartisan vote, president bush pledged to vigorously enforce its provisions and defend them in court which his administration did. our process and the congress and 2006 was an example of how the system is supposed to work. we were guided by evidence and facts, not ideology.

we put principles ahead of politics. that is what congress needs to do again. it should reinforce the fundamental principles of the voting rights act and assure that citizens have the information and access they need to participate in our democracy and at the very least future changes to election procedures should be subject to mandatory advance public disclosure that includes enough information so that citizens have a chance to analyze and understand what is happening and seek a remedy if there is discrimination. [applause] beyond the voting rights act, congress should consider additional measures to improve elections in the country including reforms that would make it easier for people to

become registered and stay registered. the bipartisan commission to improve voting that president obama announced in his state of the union addresses a good start. it is chaired by his campaign lawyer and romney campaign's lawyer and i hope the findings receive a serious hearing when they are announced. in the senate i championed the bill that requires making election day a federal holiday, require states to work to reduce waiting times at polling places, provide early voting, put in place uniform standards for voter registration, and identification by including same-day registration across the country as well as make it a federal crime to deceive voters by sending flyers to minority neighborhoods of false information. it was important to provide a paper record and improved security measures for electronic voting machines as well. there are many problems that we cannot fix but preserving fairness and equality in our voting system is one that we can and we should.

as secretary of state i saw the countries take steps to increase voter participation and strengthen their democratic processes. there is no reason we cannot do the same in america. [applause] i am well or that persuading a gridlocked congress to address these problems will not be easy but that does not mean we should give up and walk away. we should redouble our efforts in this is where all of you, and. -- and this is where all of you come in. enforcing the voting rights act has always depended on activists and advocates working at the grassroots level. more than ever that is what we need. i want to praise the aba for your strong stand. your amicus brief in shelby urged the court to uphold the voting rights act because it -- the work was not done and protections against discrimination were still needed. since 2004, the aba has worked with a nonpartisan election protection coalition to provide

on the ground legal assistance to voters, especially minority areas. volunteers have fielded complaints on telephone hotlines, interceded with state and local officials to prevent abuses, and spend countless hours in polling places and courthouses. i understand the aba will mark law day 2014 next may 1 with the theme, why every vote matters. when i chaired the commission on women in the profession and traveled all over the country talking to lawyers and judges and bar associations and law firms, anyone who would listen to our findings, i saw firsthand the power and reach of the people in this room and who you represent. you know the law, you speak the language, you can harness its authority. that gives you a unique ability to drive progress, right wrongs, and help our nation

lived up to our finest ideals. no country has a richer tradition than the united states. i ask each of you to take up this cause in your practices and communities. educate your neighbors, your local leaders about voting rights. scrutinize changes to election procedures, write an op-ed, call a congressman, tell them you believe in the right to vote, not just for yourself but for your fellow citizens and tell them that our government cannot fully represent the people unless it has been fairly elected by them. as you go home -- [applause] to your local bar association, your courthouses, your law offices, please ask yourself what more you can do on your own with your local bar association, with the aba, to be that

advocate for justice. how can we bring a lot to-- the law into people's lives and help it serve and empower them? one of my early mentors as a lawyer was a lawyer who argued pivotal voting right cases for the kennedy justice department. in 1963 in mississippi, john stepped between angry protesters and armed police to prevent a potential massacre after the murder of medgar evers. that was the kind of lawyer and later he was. years later he gave me a photo. our nation's greatness is not a birthright, it must be earned by every generation and i am confident that we can earn it for this time.