we need to make it clear that we are not part of the problem. that is the problem with syria, the u.s. stepped up and said it is an international norm, but somehow it is the sole responsibility of the u.s. to enforce it. that reinforces the message that that reinforces the message that if something bad happens in the world, it is because the u.s. has decided to allow it. that we could decide otherwise. that is not true. when i was visiting a refugee camp in northern jordan, i was shocked at the number of refugees who said why don't you stop this. assad must be stopped, why isn't the u.s. doing it? we really are not capable of doing it. we cannot fix every problem in the world. the obama administration understands that. they have pushed to continue for a more cooperative approach. let us work with our allies to solve these problems instead of assuming that the u.s. has to show up and fix it. that is why in afghanistan -- everything that happens is our fault.

we did not do enough for we did too much. we pulled out after the soviets fell, now we are back in and -- we have got to set more realistic expectations. work with local partners and international allies and try to fix the problem. this will be a long, tough battle. we are not going to be universally loved while we are trying to protect our country from al qaeda. if we make some of those changes, we can prosecute that war more effectively ended in a way that will build greater -- build a greater chance of winning the ideological war, which is the most important piece. >> thank you very much, that was a tour de force across many of the most relevant issues today and national security policy. we will be challenged to stay inside our time. let me pull a few of the

elements you raised together. early in your talk, you spoke on the use of unmanned systems. in the news, it is the aerial systems in particular. it is safe to say that there is a general consensus that these systems will become ubiquitous -- not of their legal use, but in other uses. while it is -- not of their lethal use, but in other uses. while it is aerial now, land and sea will proliferate as well. what is your sense -- given the issues we have had on the lethal targeting side -- different from a cruise missile, what are ways the u.s. can lead the rest of the world in setting norms in this area? >> that is difficult. i will come back to the central argument.

the norm we are looking at is when is a legal strike appropriate? i do not know -- drones, we are supposed to call them unmanned systems -- i don't know that they change the fundamental questions. other countries are going to develop these things. how they use them is going to fit into many of the same conundrums and difficulties of what is an appropriate way to fight. you have seen that in syria. assad has killed tens of thousands of civilians, apparently a few thousand with chemical weapons. i agree that chemical weapons are a problem.

you still have that -- if you are killing someone in war, the instrument that you use is really only one piece of -- not even the most important piece. i do think that we can make it clearer that what we are doing here is fighting a war. i think people have forgotten that. they assume that the rooms -- the drones, we are going to use them -- it is part of the war. you have to make the self- defense case within international law. i think it is right there for us to make. when you read amnesty international and other reports, their main complaint is that they don't know. they go from saying that they do not know too that they do know. you're not telling us why you do this, therefore you are doing it illegally. a leap of logic. the point is, transparency and oversight. that is true of any military action. you can get into spying issues and all that. the world has changed in terms of information. i cannot begin to articulate how

we manage all that. on the using as a weapon of war, we should stick to traditional international norms. >> that goes into the authorization for the use of military force. the president has said he is interested in working with congress to modify it. what are your thoughts on how the aumf is still applicable today. given the fight from pakistan to other leaders and how congress can help the president craft a way forward. >> it is very much still applicable. it has gone through a fairly tortured history. originally, it was tied to those who perpetrated 9/11 and it morphed from some interesting court decisions that interpret

it more broadly. we codified it in congress in 2011, it allowed us to be the groups that threaten us. al qaeda, taliban. it is within the self-defense context. i would say it is highly unlikely that we are going to modify the aumf. you change a punctuation mark in that thing, you are looking at 10 years worth of losses for both sides. congress must have -- of lawsuits for both sides. congress must have meant this. as if we move as one body. and that is the risk, if you change the aumf, that is why the white house was nervous when we did it in 2011. it was not that they wanted more or less authority, but if you change it you give rise to a variety of legal actions. it is probably going to stay where it is out. the larger question is asked al qaeda and -- as al qaeda and groups move around, there are a letter different groups out there who affiliate in some way with the violent and nihilistic ideology of al qaeda. there are only a few that are

actually plotting attacks against us. those are the ones we need to focus on. afghanistan prior to 9/11, a lot of them moved to pakistan, to yemen, somalia is a tougher question. we now have concerns about what is going to happen with aqim in mali and libya. the existing aumf give the president flexibility to follow those targets. modification would cause more trouble than it would solve. >> i would ask one more question than open to the audience. as the ranking member of the authorizing committee for defense, given your very appropriate comments about the effects of the shutdown and continued uncertainty on the defense and national security community, what is it that you and your committee are thinking of being able to do in this year

and in this environment. to help on the strategic front and creating a pathway forward for the defense community? >> we are working on different issues, 1206, 1203, trying to give greater flexibility to the war fighter as they confront the challenges that they face. we are strongly supportive of the special operations command. that is a key piece of this ally development, building partner capacity. they refer to it -- preparation of the environment. what are you preparing it for, exactly? the answer is -- we are trying to prepare it so we do not have insurgencies. that is training security forces, making sure governance is happening. they do medical care in certain

places, trying to build a local population. and a lot of that is what we have done in the philippines. the big war approach in this ideological struggle -- you things run strikes have negative consequences. send in western troops to a country -- not a winner. trying to focus on that, building the partner capacity, using the asymmetric tools that we have. that is all great. as long as we are lurching from crisis to crisis and you have sequestration and the cr, as you know, it is tough. it is tough to function when you don't know how much money you're going to have. >> very true. we will have some mics going around. raise your hand, give us your name and affiliation. right appear -- up here.

>> thank you for your understatement and restraint in describing the political situation. i would like to go back to the ideological struggle. 10 years ago, the defense science board released a report to arnold rumsfeld about the war on -- donald rumsfeld about the war on terror. it said that we have to win the war of ideas, we are losing the war of ideas. during world war ii, we and the brits had great propaganda. during the cold war, reagan's, to take down the wall. why are we there like -- de relict in having a propaganda -- derelict in having a propaganda campaign to discredit and do all the things we need to do. the only thing state is doing is trying to turn a couple use off the internet.

why is it impossible for us to mount the ideological campaign that is essential and would have big dividends for a small amount of money. >> a great point. to quote tom friedman, to underscore the idea we are not having success with the ideological struggle. with syria, assad, you have a lot of moderate democrats who want to overturn him and create a better style of government. not western -- that is one of the challenges. we should not approach this by saying the world should be like us. the world does not want to be like us, we cannot blame them. it is not the same as the cold war. the cold war -- the way we won the cold war was here is your

grocery store, here is our grocery store, we win. religion is much more central to the way they want to govern. trying to convince them to be like us is not going to work. in syria, you have got the moderate elements and then you have al qaeda. there are foreign fighters coming from all over the muslim world. they are coming on the side of al qaeda. if there is one single soul showing up in syria to fight for the free syrian movement, for freedom and democracy, i am unaware. we're not doing as much as we should. we have very little credibility. that makes it hard. as a member of congress, i can tell you how difficult it is when you do not have much credibility. in detail. for a variety of reasons, it was very interesting in egypt -- both sides were claiming that the other side had u.s. support.

even the people who were opposed -- the muslim brotherhood, they were claiming that the u.s. was behind them. basically -- if it appears the u.s. is involved in something, it is by definition not credible. how do you do that, how do you handle that? i do not think we have been as creative as we need to be -- the most effective thing is negative campaign. al qaeda has killed more muslims than any movement in the history of the world. they are not good. the taliban -- we can show and iraq, to some degree, we were successful. the iraq movement was driven by the fact that these violent people -- they are killing you, they are terrible. we need to use that more effectively.

the real challenge is, in a transparent world, how do you do propaganda? we have not figure that out. propaganda is dependent upon probable deniability and the hidden hand. there are no hidden hands, that makes it more difficult. one of the big problems with the whole nsa thing -- people had this perception, a lot of the articles were flat wrong about what we were doing. a good thing convincing -- but good luck convincing people of that. credibility is a challenge. the most effective way to do this is partner capacity. get moderate, credible elements, there are some groups doing this. within the muslim world, they have to be the messengers. if we are the messengers, it is not going to go over well. that is where we should focus our efforts, building partner capacity and delivering that message. >> very good. >> hi, james from the open society foundations. as we expand our efforts to build partner capacity, we might

encounter the dilemma of democratic society to achieving stability. units that are engaging in questionable behavior, we might be losing the second challenge of the ideological battle. how do you strike that balance? where does contractual -- where does congressional oversight like 1206 come into play? >> that is one of the single biggest problems we have. there is no government that is not going to have something that people can criticize. no matter who you are backing, there will be an argument that they are not open, free, fair. things like the leahy amendment, trying to limit our ability if you have situations where militaries are committing atrocities and we have to pull out.

if a government is overthrown, we have to pull out -- mali, egypt we are wrestling with out a little bit. this engagement is the wrong approach. -- disengagement is the wrong approach. saying that if you do anything bad, we are out and we won't have anything to do with you. it is more harmful than helpful. we have to emphasize that we are trying to push these countries and his allies to have greater respect for human rights and be more democratic. we have done that in a number of places. it is not perfect. the power of negative campaigning, if that is what people are concerned about, amnesty international came out with a huge study of our efforts. where is the amnesty international study of all the people al qaeda has killed and how indiscriminately they have gone after civilian?

it is not even comparable. to say that they are not trying to do that -- you know, let's have a little balance. let's point out that the people we are fighting have killed far more innocent people and we have. they do it intentionally, as part of their plan. we have to emphasize the alternative. there is no perfect system. if we are held up to that standard. in the u.s., you have to only support perfect governments, that is a propaganda war you can never win. >> ok, right over here in the purple shirt. >> you expressed your belief that the killing of how a walking -- omar all walking -- al-alwaki was justified.

how about the drone attack of his teenage son? >> i think that is why we need to be more transparent in explaining our tax. if an attack happens there needs to be at least a one paragraph justification. even in the case of al alwaki, the administration has not released justification. i do not have any doubt that there are some drone strikes that were mistakenly made. that there -- for whatever reason, they misread the target, misread what they were doing, that is a problem. that is why transparency is important. i do not have an answer. i do not know the specifics of that attack.

>> is congress trying to do the investigation that amnesty did? >> yes, we do get oversight, we do get briefed. i do not have the details of the different attacks. i have been briefed on them. that is a misconception. anyone in congress has access to all the information for why these attacks were done. part of my problem in presenting this is that is classified. even if i did know the answer, i could not give it publicly. that is where i think the administration can be more transparent. they can keep a lot of it classified, they can choose to release enough so that people know here is why we did it. and that there is a clear justification. the amnesty report, the biggest part of it is the transparency. -- is no transparency. was this attack justified? the administration said that it

was, i believe them, but the public has not seen the information and is understandably skeptical. the oversight congress is able to exercise is helpful, but we cannot be transparent either. we cannot go out and talk about it. >> i would add that the u.n. report, coming out a few days before the amnesty report, hits transparency very hard. right here. >> i am from upi. i was wondering, in terms of -- you said some of the attacks might be mistaken. would you advocate for repercussions in those cases? there is critique that oversight would interfere with national security decisions, if you could, and on that.-- if you could comment on that.

>> no, this is war. in war, mistakes are made all the time. as i said, civilians suffer in a war zone. they always do. part of the problem with some of the arguments on the unmanned vehicles campaign, we have tried to argue that this is different. they are more discriminating -- all of those things are true, it is somewhat better than a traditional military invasion. it is somewhat better than a cruise missile. it is still war, civilians are going to be vulnerable. we went through this in iraq, afghanistan. there are certain times where mistakes are made, we had the horrific mistake with the joint base lewis mccord soldier who killed civilians, that was a crime. he has been prosecuted and convicted.

i do not see evidence of that, but it is war. the second part? >> [indiscernible] >> there is that balance to be struck. but the administration seems to have the attitude that we can share nothing. if we share information, it is going to make is for both. that is particularly ironic in this day and age, it comes out anyway. part of the justification for not talking to congress is that they do not trust congress not to leak it. but we read about in the paper from someone who leaked it from the administration. i understand sources, you want to protect that. but how does it make us more vulnerable to come out in one paragraph and say here is what we know about this guy, this is

why we took this shot. it was in self-defense, this person is a fill you did with -- is affiliated with this group, they were putting these attacks. then you can say it is classified, but at least make the justification. president obama's speech, mr. brennan made a speech, jeh johnson, they have play this out. the administration things that theymetimes believes give a speech and then it is done. we explained it, leave us alone. it is a more constant process of justifying and explaining your actions. a message has to be repeated. as a campaign person, the moment when people are sick of our message is when it will penetrate to the people we are

trying to reach. you cannot just sum it up, i told you, believe it, leave me alone. that is by greater transparency would be helpful. i think you can do it in a way that does not jeopardize national security. >> right here in the middle. >> pat with defense daily. we are at war, but you remind me of the remarks about the u.s. involvement in vietnam. we may kill more of their soldiers but eventually we will tire of the war. the fact of the matter is that budgets are down, sequestration is the law of the land. how much longer can the u.s. afford to be fighting all these wars against an enemy that will

continue to respond as long as we are prosecuting these efforts ? it seems that we have a limited amount of money, but our prosecution needs ever more amounts. >> in this case i disagree very strongly. how much longer can we prosecute this war? as long as it takes. this is not vietnam, some domino theory abstraction. this is a group of people who as we sit here today are trying to figure out how to kill as many of us as possible. we need to figure out how to stop them. the good news is, it is not quite as expensive as you describe. what we learned in the last decade, full-scale, 100,000 troop invasions are expensive and not a successful way to prosecute this war. if we build partner capacity, maintain intel, it is cheaper than people realize. we have built an infrastructure, by and large we have been successful in disrupting al qaeda cells.

the larger part is the ideology and the metastasis nation -- different governments creating environments for the ideology. the specific problem of stopping terrorist groups that are plotting attacks against us has to be something that we cannot give up on. we cannot say we're going to stop trying to stop them and see what happens. i think we can do it in a cost- effective manner, we have to. it would be vastly more easy to do if we would get rid of this ridiculous isolationist nihilism that the federal government is awful and we must cut it. people say the tea party is running this country. grover norquist is running this

country. he wants to shrink the government down so we can fit it in his bathtub, that is the ideology the republican house is governing on. we can argue about ideology, plenty of things wrong with the democratic party. when you consistently take the crowd out of the federal government -- kick the crap out of the federal government by not funding it, threatening to raise the debt ceiling, that undermines our ability. i hope that at some point we will get over this. that makes it more difficult. it is too important a problem to walk away from. >> over here. >> congressman, retired. what about the use of drones? dod is constrained.

cbp, not so much. your thoughts? >> that is not the topic this morning. i am more focused on the aumf. we have had that issue, it is not just drones, cameras have proliferated. there is a controversy in seattle, they wanted to put up campbell's -- they wanted to put up cameras in the port of seattle. they have been counties and cities that want drones, people are concerned. i can give a lengthy answer about policy applications of that, i will say it is a big challenge. a lot of times you do not have that information. you think about the people we have captured -- the bombing and b -- the bombing in boston, there were a lot of cameras

around. it is security versus liberty, that is getting increasingly confiscated due to technology. >> how about right in the back. >> thank you. andre, u.s. army retired. i used to teach counterinsurgency. working in michigan now. i think it is the most brilliant, lucid, objective description i have heard of how we use drones and why we use drones. by question is this, on drones. my feeling is, from hearing president obama's speech at the ndu on national security. his idea, what he is working towards, is phasing out drones. using them now for the reasons you articulated, we are at work, they work. to that targets that are targeting us. you gave such a great description, he has, too, of the

blowback and the long range problem of countering the ideology. do you believe that his comment that the war on terror must end. dealing with the ideological problem by phasing out the drones and handling remnants of al qaeda with police forces and cooperation among police forces and intelligence. senator kerry believes that. >> i think i got it. i think that is the intent. this is also a challenge.

this is one of the battles that we fight in congress. senator graham is on the opposite side. the controversy over al-libi, captured in libya. they think that we should hold -- treated as a war, military custody. they were aggressive in saying that anyone we captured affiliated with these croup should be in -- with these groups should be in military custody domestically. the argument is that there is some greater value you can get out of questioning somebody in military custody then in a law- enforcement setting. you could debate that a little bit.

the fbi has had success in getting information out of people. granting that there is more information you can get out of military custody, the downside of the perpetual war approach is what is being missed. our allies, the muslim world, u.s. citizens get tired of a perpetual war approach. that is the closing guantanamo, the other thing that i meant to mention, we need to get rid of indefinite dissension -- i ndefinite detention, the notion that we have the right to grab anyone in the world and hold them without charge indefinitely. we may have a justification for that. but the downside, in terms of winning the ideological war, is enormous. it cannot simply be dismissed. as much as i would like -- i wouldn't actually like to live in this world -- as some people would like to live in a world where we decide something is important to us and everyone has to fall in line.

we have got to figure out how to work with them. we should move back towards "regular order." we have got a constitution, a court system, once upon a time, that was the envy of the world. to the extent that we get back to us, that helps us in the ideological war. >> you mentioned closing guantanamo. i want to make sure you had an opportunity talk about that. there are various ways one can do that. in combination or in singular. transfer, release, movement to a u.s. civilian or military facility. do you have a preferred approach to closing guantánamo? >> absolutely. i do not think it is that complicated. paul knows this, there is somewhere in the neighborhood, we are down to 160 folks there. well over half of them had been deemed releasable.

there are concerns, recidivism, all of that. you release those who are releaseable back to their own country. is there any risk and that? any time you really someone, there is risk. but then the argument is we will not release you, that is not good criminal justice policy. and everyone else down there that we at determine that we cannot release, we try and convict them, we houston in the -- we house them in the u.s. there are many public policy arguments. the notion that we cannot hold dangerous people safely in the u.s. is patently absurd. yet, it drives the debate.

the reason that we have not closed guantanamo, keep in mind, this was not some big liberal goal. gates, john mccain, george w. bush said we should close guantanamo. i will skip the political argument. the argument was that it is placing us at risk. we cannot bring criminals into the u.s.. that argument took hold. in the u.s. right now, we have mass murderers, some of the most violent, nihilistic people you could imagine, we have terrorists. ramzi yousef, the blind sheikh. if we cannot safely hold dangerous people, we have problems that have nothing to do with guantánamo.

we can absolutely hold them here, and we should. congress continues to block it. how to get around that argument? i do not know. once it takes hold -- the solution is simple, release the ones that can be released. lock up the rest in super max facilities. just like we have done with other folks. >> one last question. >> air force fellow at csis. thank you for being here today. you talked about building partnership capacity. what role do unmanned systems play in that? mtcrb -- should it be revised? the missile technology control regime. >> a couple of pieces to that. unmanned systems -- their

inability to gather information. that is one of the capacities that our partners don't have. as we pulled out of afghanistan, how do we build that capacity? i think they can play a role. the thing i am worried about, we have paranoia about selling these systems. we have a huge problem in italy and elsewhere. that is a huge mistake. i have done a great deal of work on export control. our export control policy has been a disaster. it is based on the premise that somehow we in the u.s. are the only ones capable of building military equipment. if we don't let it out, it will never happen. that does not work well, it demonstrates -- it devastates our industrial base. satellites are a great example. in the late 1990's we had 2/3 of

the global satellite market, we are now down to three percent. basically -- 20%. if the component parts you sold could go into a satellite, you could not sell it overseas. if you sold bolts that went into a satellite, you could not export that without going through this regime. we need a more open way of looking at this. people are going to develop drone technology. we certainly should sell it to our allies. that is a way to build partner capacity. we are concerned about these things falling into the wrong hands, i get that. iran, they fall into the wrong

hands whether we are selling them to our allies or not. we have an overly paranoid approach to export controls that harms us. we have reformed it, one of the things we got last year was a dramatic reform of the export control regime. it gave the administration flexibility, that is moving forward in a positive direction. the regime right now is problematic. finally, it is very problematic because it harms domestic u.s. industry. i used to have these arguments on the armed services committee. people would yell at me, we cannot choose corporations over national security. i tried in vain for better than a decade to explain that that was not the choice. our industrial base is important to our national security. one of the great advantages we have had for decades is the best, brightest companies,

technology, equipment were u.s. companies. that is not to say that we cannot buy things. we have a vastly better relationship with a us-based company to meet our industrial base needs for national security if they are the leaders. if we hamstring them so they cannot compete, they will cease to be the leaders. once they cease to be the leaders, we lose a national security advantage that is not insignificant. there is no way for the rest of the world -- they're going to build technology, we are not going to dominate the way we dominated post-world war ii. i would still like to leave. to hamstring u.s. companies' ability to get markets is problematic. >> let me mention that csis in november will be beginning and unmanned systems working group series. we will look at a lot of these

issues that have come up today. i asked the audience to join me in thanking representative smith for spending time and getting a great talk. thank you very much. [applause] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] held to protest surveillance. speakers included former congressman and former new mexico governor jerry johnson. was organized by the coalition "stop watching us." here's a preview. the national security state is government as a racket. thatrotection racket extracts millions from taxpayers. with the promise to protect us. what we get instead of reduction

and killings of civilians around the world. what we get is the destruction , includingip abroad leaders we call our friends. the nsa appears to have gone rogue. it has become a threat to freedom at home and abroad. [cheers and applause] in the our friends international community to understand that there are many americans who object to the mass collection of private germany, france, mexico, brazil, and other countries. we insist on freedom and privacy and solidarity with our friends. [indiscernible]

privacyt on freedom and and solidarity with our friends in france. french]g privacyt on freedom and and solidarity with our friends in mexico and throughout the spanish-speaking world. eaking spanish] in solidarity with our friends peakingil, we say [s brazilian] [applause] >> you can watch the rally in its entirety and sunday at 2:05 here are c-span.

minister talked recently about u.s.-pakistan and national security challenges. the prime minister met with president obama the day after this event in the first face-to- face meeting. from the u.s. institute of peace, this is 45 minutes. >> thank you all. go ahead and sit. some of you have been here for a couple of hours. i really appreciate your patience.

we are delighted to be hosting prime minister sharif. i think everyone is well aware of the fact that pakistan's success is world success, and world success is american success. we congratulate pakistan on the peaceful transition of power, democratic elections. it was a remarkable showing of strength by your party. not expected. quite a showing of strength. i would like to recognize a few people who are here today. ike, a member of the board. andrew wilder, our vice president for south and central asia. and our pakistan director, a good team of people who brought this event together. i think everyone in the room is pretty familiar with u.s. ip,

but others are watching from television. the united states institute of peace has a mission, globally, of attempting to prevent, mitigate, and resolve violent conflict. that is really our focus. we work very closely with the state department, the defense department, usaid, other government entities, ngo's, and parties all over the world to further that mission. our most active programs are now in iraq, afghanistan, pakistan. our south and central asia program is quite large. where pakistan alone is concerned, we have convened roughly 80 meetings here with experts from all over the world to talk about pakistan and how to move pakistan forward, in the last three years alone. we have done a lot of analytical work in pakistan, looking at the things that prompt violence and

what might be done to lessen the violence, to build the capacity of civil society, reading groups together to talk about differences of opinion. as everybody knows, we are very actively involved in the election process in afghanistan. stability for afghanistan is critically important for stability in pakistan. the last thing you need is a collapse and ethnic tsunami arising from afghanistan, because it will not be contained within those borders.

the prime minister is in a difficult part of the world. he has a difficult job. we appreciate his being here. the event will involve remarks from the prime minister. we will ask steve hadley, a former national security advisor in the bush administration, to sit with the prime minister and ask questions in a casual setting after the prime minister has finished with his remarks. when we are done, i would ask that everyone remain seated while the official party leaves, and i thank you for your patience already, and hope you enjoyed this event. mr. prime minister, will you come forward? [applause] >> thank you. congressman, jim marshall,

president, u.s. ip, mr. stephen hadley, distinguished guests, amazing gentleman, i am honored to speak at this prestigious for him -- four room -- forum on peace and regional development. we appreciate usip's noble mission of promoting peace and understanding among nations. ladies and to him and -- and gentlemen, i have come here as the elected leader of pakistan, a land of ancient civilizations and rich cultural traditions, but still young and aspiring to

be modern, moderate, and progressive. 180 million enterprising, hard- working people, dreaming of a better model in a rapidly changing world. they yearn for peace, security, and well-being that have eluded them for the past many decades. it is their hopes and aspirations i have come here to voice before this learned gathering. ladies and gentlemen, this has been a momentous year in our history. not only have we had a free, fair, and transparent general election, but a transfer of power from one elected government to another.

an elected president succeeded another elected president in a graceful sermon he the entire nation witnessed with a deep sense of satisfaction. these events would, of course, be of a routine nature to you. but for us, they represent a remarkable transformation of our democratic venture, signifying critical maturity not only for the electorate, but for the mainstream parties as well. they will surely strengthen the democratic institutions in pakistan. ladies and gentlemen, we view the mandate given to our party as a trust of the nation, which we shall endeavor to protect and promote in a manner that strengthens the democratic institutions and enhances the welfare of the people. this is a new and confident pakistan.

but i am not oblivious of the daunting challenges that we have inherited. my government is fully aware of the enormous economic and security challenges that face us today. we are also conscious that the people of pakistan have high expectations from us, given the fact that earlier terms in office introduced reforms to liberalize the economy, strengthen the private sector, facilitate foreign investment, and create a business climate in the country. these enabled us to complete major infrastructure projects, such as modern motorways, ports, airports, and dams. we intend to resume our journey where it was interrupted by the

military coup in 1999, with reforms at home and a new direction in foreign policy. we want well-being of all our people without any discrimination. ladies and gentlemen, we also recognize the realization of this agenda requires internal peace and security, as well as peace and stability in the neighborhood, which is why we are determined to transform our relation with friends around the

world, but more importantly, with our immediate neighbors. i am, however, aware that the greatest challenge to pakistan comes from terrorism and extremism. pakistan is neither a source of nor the epicenter of terrorism, as is sometimes alleged. in fact, pakistan itself has been a major victim of the scourge for over a decade. pakistan sacrifices in the struggle against terrorism and extremism are well known. we have faced hundreds of suicide attacks in the past decade. we have lost over 7000 of our brave soldiers, security personnel, and policeman.

our casualties exceeded 40,000 lives. our sacrifices are immeasurable, both in terms of the loss of human lives and the damage caused to our infrastructure. excuse me. my government has resolved to bring this cycle of bloodshed and violence to an end. but it cannot be done overnight, nor can it be done by unleashing senseless force and star citizens without first making every effort to bring the misguided and confused elements of society back to the mainstream. we also have to ensure that the political parties and civil society are on the same page. the political parties and civil society are on the same page so as to create the environment necessary to tackle this menace. it was to this end that an extraordinary expression of national unity and cohesion -- the party conference underlined

the imperative need of giving peace a chance. ladies and gentlemen, my government is also determined to address the challenge posed by a weak economy. while recognizing the urgency of focusing on the energy or, which has hampered our natural growth national growth and created huge social unrest. major reforms have already been introduced to ensure some macroeconomic policies, to reduce budgetary deficits that show balance of payment, curb inflationary pressure, and reduce the country's dependence on foreign loans and assistance. we are also engaged in efforts to bring half a million new taxpayers. these measures should enhance

the tax to gdp ratio from the current law of 9% to 15% by 2018. it has been decided to privatize the major state owned enterprises, including entities such as the national airlines, the steel mills, and the national oil and gas companies. turning to foreign relations, i wish to state that we firmly believe that a peaceful, stable, and united pakistan is in pakistan's vital interest. our efforts are therefore focused on helping afghanistan, which is growing through a vitally important phase, with security and critical transition underway. pakistan wishes these

transitions to be peaceful and smooth. we also wish the international community to remain engaged in supporting pakistan's reconstruction and economic relevance. we hope for an afghanistan that is firmly on the path of stability and prosperity. an essential element of our policy -- we strongly support an inclusive afghan-led peace and reconciliation process. during president karzai's recent visit to pakistan, we reaffirm our solidarity with afghanistan and its people. i also showed president karzai

that we wish neither to interfere in afghanistan's internal affairs, nor do we have any favorites in afghanistan. it is our earnest hope to see the afghans themselves united for peace, prosperity, and development of their country. simultaneously, we are making efforts to upgrade our bilateral relationships with afghanistan. my own vision is it should be defined by a strong economic partnership.

in addition to hosting billions of afghan refugees for decades, pakistan is extending more than $450 million for afghanistan's reconstruction and capacity building, with special focus on infrastructure and education sectors. we have also decided to extend peshawa highway to kabul, to bring afghanistan into the regional economic hub. we believe we can work for regional economic cooperation that would reinforce regional trade, energy, and communication corridors. corridors include participating in may get energy projects. turkmenistan, afghanistan,

the karachi-to show up -- peshawa highway to kabul, to bring afghanistan into the regional economic hub. we believe we can work for regional economic cooperation that would reinforce regional trade, energy, and communication corridors. corridors include participating in may get energy projects. turkmenistan, afghanistan, pakistan, india, and central asia, south asia will create a project that would undoubtedly help strengthen efforts for peace and stability, and advance our dominant objectives of progress and prosperity. our other important neighbor is india. with which we share a common history, as well as common destiny. our past and our future are intertwined. pakistan is happy to see the people of india live in peace and security. the people of pakistan want to resolve all standing issues with india through dialogue and negotiations. we are confident there are areas where we can make progress. we also wish to put ourselves on the path for normalizing trade relations with india. my meeting with the prime minister last night in new york reflected this desire. i am confident we can resolve

all issues, as long as we stay engaged. we do not want isolated incidents to interrupt our dialogue. our message is simple. economic development in south asia depends on peace and security in the region. therefore, all of us have a stake in working for these noble objectives, for our own state -- sake as well as the sake of future generations. it is about time the sides address their bilateral issues with utmost seriousness. they should avail themselves of the opportunity of devoting their energies and resources to development and betterment of their teeming millions. may i add that had our two countries not wasted their precious resources in a never- ending arms race, we would not only have avoided the futile

conflicts, but also emerged as stable and prosperous nations. i wish to ensure this august audience that pakistan desires to live in peace with its neighbor. we would not be found wanting in walking the extra mile. our dream is to realize the potential of mutually beneficial economic cooperation at the bilateral level, as well as the broader regional level. even more promising are the prospects of interregional cooperation. we are a technologically advanced, fast-growing region. south asia has a chance to benefit from the energy rich central asia and west asia. there is a huge potential for interregional trade, transit, and connectivity.

pakistan provide central asia with the shortest access to the warm waters of the arabian sea. ladies and gentlemen, contrary to common perception, pakistan- united states relations have stood the test of time. despite the occasional pickups, the solid foundation of this vital relationship has always why should the -- whether the occasional storms and turbulence. as democracy takes loose in pakistan, there is support for building a strong and stable partnership between the two countries. it should be based on mutual interest and mutual respect, as so clearly articulated by president obama in his speech. our country share perceptions and interests on a wide range of issues. these include afghanistan's

peace and stability, in south asia in the middle east, as well as extremism and terrorism. moreover, despite the planned drawdown, there will be a continuing need for close cooperation between the two countries, especially in afghanistan. key issues of mutual concern include terrorism, united nations reform, international economic cooperation, and the environment. pakistan appreciates the constructive role the u.s. has historically played in defusing tensions between afghanistan and between pakistan and india. with growing influence in india, the u.s. has the capacity to do more to help the sides resolve their court disputes, and in promoting a culture of cooperation.

ladies and gentlemen, there is, however, the matter of drone strikes, which are deeply disturbed and agitated our people. in my first statement to the parliament, i made a strong commitment to ending the attacks. both parties in a national conference have declared that the use of drones is not only a continued violation of our territorial integrity, but also detrimental to our resolve and efforts at eliminating terrorism from our country. this issue has become a major irritant in our bilateral relationship as well. i would therefore stress the need for an end to drone attacks. ladies and gentlemen, it is my endeavor to approach this important relationship with an open and fresh mind. leaving behind the baggage of trust deficit and mutual suspicions. instead, cooperation in key areas, including trade, investment, energy, technology, and agriculture, under the rubric of strategic dialogue, should be the main plan of our partnership.

as large democracies, there should be greater interaction between our countries, not only at the parliamentary level, but through exchange of businessmen, students, opinion makers, and tourism, as these would help remove many of our misperceptions. moreover, the traditionally strong ties at the military level should be liberated. the vibrant community of pakistani americans is playing an important role in bringing our nations closer. i am thankful to them, as they constitute a permanent link between our countries that can and should play unimportant role in eliminating the negative perceptions. ladies and gentlemen, as a responsible nuclear power and a major development country, pakistan is destined to play a key role in regional stability and world peace and security. pakistan remains fully alive to

protecting its sovereignty, integrity, and independents. without engaging in an arms race, pakistan will maintain credible minimum deterrence to ensure regional security and stability. we will consistently pursue the rules of disarmament on a nondiscriminatory basis. it is our hope that the united states will follow an evenhanded and nondiscriminatory approach. it feels like civil nuclear cooperation. as you would be aware, pakistan is a country blessed with him nor ms. human and material resources. it is strategically located at the crossroads of south and east asia on one side, and central

asia and west asia on the other. pakistan is a natural land bridge connecting these two vast regions, and thus has the potential of becoming a hub of transit and trade among these regions, with a widening civil society, a critical media and independent judiciary, a huge reservoir of educated young population, and the phenomenal expansion of ip networks. pakistan is emerging as a modern, knowledge-based society, with a developing physical infrastructure, attractive investment incentives. pakistan is poised to attract its due share from the process of globalization. we started democratic transition after the may elections, hailed by the international community.

it has also instilled confidence among the investor community within that country and abroad. i avail myself of this opportunity to invite the united states private sector to join us in efforts for sustained economic growth and development. it is the key for progress across the entire spectrum of challenges that we are facing today, from terrorism and extremism to other sectors. it is also essential for strengthening democracy and the rule of law. this is what we have learned from our own experience. this is what i recall president franklin roosevelt emphasizing in one of his speeches. true freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence. people who are hungry and out of jobs are the stuff of which dictatorships are made.

ladies and gentlemen, i am aware of the fact that the driving motivation of the founding fathers of this great nation was an intense desire to live in a country where religious freedom and economic opportunities would be available to all. our founding fathers to sought to establish a homeland with similar goals. there is therefore a natural affinity between our peoples. the overwhelming majority have formed a belief in the same just and merciful god, which reminds me of jesus christ's sermon on the mount, when he declared, blessed are the peacemakers. some six centuries later, when the holy crown was revealed to

fully profit mohammed, peace be upon him, we were reminded of the eternal truths. we made you into nations and tribes so that you may know each other. the most honored of you in the sight of god is he who is most righteous of you. let us therefore endeavor, ladies and gentlemen, to know each other better, so we can all make our own modest contribution to making the world a better place. thank you. [applause]

>> again, prime minister, it is a real honor to have you with us today. thank you for your thoughtful remarks. i just have two or three questions that i thought we might use as an opening for further conversation and elaboration on some of the points you made in your address. new are seen widely as someone who prioritizes the roof five full of the pakistani economy as a way to the country's success, and to peace.

how challenging is this task? do you feel you have managed to put the economy on a path to sustained progress, even though you have only been in office for four months? could you talk a little bit about your hopes for the pakistani economy? >> we are facing a huge challenge in pakistan, which i just now mentioned in my address. the economy is also one of those huge challenges we are confronted with. our party, while in the 1990's, while we were of course in office, came out with very bold

economic reforms that became very popular in the country. we very successfully implemented those reforms in the 1990's, which also included privatization, the nationalization -- denationalization of state owned enterprises. we did so with other state owned enterprises very successfully. we were running into losses, and losses were being picked up the government. they are now making huge profits, and paying tax worth billions of rupees in pakistan today. the economy is very badly effected -- affected by the scourge of terrorism we have

been facing in pakistan, as i just mentioned. we have to put the economy right. today, energy is one of our biggest problems. it has not been addressed by successive governments in pakistan, the previous

governments. this is one of the major issues which is being dealt with by this government. i hope that the international community will certainly support us in dealing with our economy, not in terms of any aid, but i believe that a lot of other things can be done, especially in when the unit of states of america opens their doors to create trade in america.

we are struggling hard to deal with the law and order situation, which i just mentioned, including the terrorism. once we are able to effectively deal with it, i believe the economy will be booming. both are interdependent. if you want to have a conducive investment climate in the country, you have to have a good law and order situation in the country. to do that, you must address the issue of poverty, unemployment. we are dealing with this issue. these are our top priorities. >> you mentioned energy. nothing seems to have hurt the pakistani economy more in the past few years than the energy crisis. do you agree with that assessment?

could you tell us about your plans for the energy sector, since it is so important for the economic growth you have talked about? >> this is an issue which has been there for the last several years, not being addressed by the previous government. the government before that. we have had outages for several hours of the day in most of the areas of pakistan. we have been able to fix this problem to some extent. i would say to a small extent. by paying off 500 billion rupees immediately after coming into office.

i think that was a very big decision and very big step our government took to solve this problem, to at least pay off the debts. now, of course, the power system in pakistan -- their are a lot of things in the system which we are trying to overcome. under capacity -- the plants are running under capacity. that is being addressed. in efficiency, of course, has crept into our system. we have come out with a very comprehensive power policy.

that provides means to the investor to come in. we have also announced an upfront tariff. they do not have to waste their time in negotiating with the government. it is a very transparent system we have introduced in pakistan. pakistan has tremendous potential in three different sect there's, in the overall energy and power sector. one is the power generation. pakistan has the ability to produce more than 100,000 megawatts in this sector alone. the government is undertaking three major projects. i just named them for you. [indiscernible]

these three will produce about 15,000 megawatts -- 16,000 megawatts of electricity. we also have set up an energy park near karachi which will produce about 6000 megawatts. this will not only help with the gap in supply and demand that we are facing today, but we will also be able to cater to energy. i would like to welcome the american investors from all over the world to come in and look at this sector. we make sure that the principal as well as the prophets are fully repatriated.

cracks in your address, you spoke passionately about approving pakistan's relations with india. >> my favorite subject. you see? >> it is a difficult subject, and not without controversy. when you say a little bit about your vision? how could you improve the relationship? particularly kashmir. is there a formula for bringing peace to kashmir?

>> my government paved the way and laid the foundation for building better relations with india. it was very kind to undertake the first ever state visit to pakistan in 1998. this was soon after the nuclear detonations by india, and subsequently followed by pakistan. that was a very successful visit. we decided we would resolve all our outstanding issues through negotiations, through peaceful means, and through talks. it was a major breakthrough. kashmir was mentioned very categorically in that agreement. i was pleasantly surprised by the statement in lahore. it let us announce -- let us declare 1999 as the year of

resolution of all problems that exist between pakistan and india, and i was pleasantly surprised to hear that. we both started working for it. we established back channels. mr. musharraf toppled our government unconstitutionally. and imposed martial law in the country. you know what he did to the country. he fired the judges, sent them home, house arrested them. we had to struggle for the reinstatement of all those judges who were unconstitutionally thrown out of office by mr. musharraf. anyway, the subject that i was discussing -- we would like to pick up the threads from where we left off in 1999.

and then move forward. i had a good meeting in new york last month. we discussed all these issues. whenever we want to move forward, something happens, and then the process again gets a serious setback. for example, when we were about to meet in new york, just weeks and days before that meeting, there were clashes on the line of control. people were getting killed from both sides -- our side, their side. we also have been in a very unfortunate arms race since the partition, for almost 66 years. i mentioned this in my speech also. i believe that we need to get out of this situation. and i believe very strongly that both countries will have to sit down together. if we sit down together, if we seriously address these issues, i do not think we will face any problem in addressing and solving these issues. kashmir, of course, is a difficult issue, difficult to resolve. i think by sitting and talking we will be able to find some way of resolving that, because that is a flashpoint, not only in the region but in the whole world. any solution which can come about will not be able to come about unless the people of all three sides endorse this. the people of india, the people of pakistan, and the people of kashmir. and of course we want to enhance our trade with india. there is so much we can do together by enhancing our trade and economic ties with each other. >> mr. prime minister, thank you

very much. we are out of time, unfortunately. the prime minister has a schedule to keep. i want to thank you for being here, and invite jim marshall to the stage again for a presentation. >> thank you very much. >> a picture from your visit. >> very efficient. [laughter] >> we try to be. thank you all. if you will remain seated while the official party leaves. thank you all. >> all the best to you. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] click next washington journal, --

>> both of the weekly addresses focus on issues involving the healthcare.gov website. president obama talks about ongoing efforts to resolve problems with the site and the house energy and commerce chairman criticizes the website and talks about the impact of the health care law.

>> hi, everybody. a few weeks ago, we launched an important new part of the affordable care act. it is called the marketplace. and for americans without health insurance, and americans who buy insurance on their own because they can't get it at work, it is a very ". if you are one of those people, the affordable care act makes you part of a big group land for the first time. the marketplace -- group p lan for the first time. the market waste puts -- the marketplace puts insurers in one place to compete for your business. ultimately, the easiest way to buy insurance in this marketplace will be a new website, healthcare.gov. but as you may have heard, the site isn't working the way it is supposed to yet. it is frustrating for all of us who have worked so hard to make sure that everyone who needs it gets health care. and it is especially frustrating for the americans who have been trying to get covered. the site has been visited more than 20 million times so far, nearly 700,000 people have

applied for coverage already, and that proves just how much demand there is for these new quality affordable health care choices. that's why, in the coming weeks, we will get it working as smoothly as it is supposed to. we have people working overtime 20 47 to boost capacity and address these problems every single day. but even as we improve the website, remember that the website isn't the only way to apply for coverage under these new plans. we have updated healthcare.gov to offer more information about enrolling over the phone, by mail, or in person with a specially trained navigator who can help answer your questions. just call 1-800-318-2596. or visit a localhelp. health care is.gov -- localhelp. healthcare.gov. everyone who wants insurance through the marketplace will get it. some people have poked fun at me this week are sounding like an insurance salesman and that's ok. i would still be out there championing the slot even if the website were her for. -- were perfect. i will never stop working to help more hard-working americans to have the security of health care. that is what we all want. that is why it is interesting to see republicans in congress saying that it has been so

difficult for people. especially considering they have spent years denying the health insurance that they just shut down the government and threaten default over it. as i have said many times before. i am willing to work with anyone on any idea that is actually willing to make us will -- this law perform better. but it is well past the time for folks to stop rooting for its failure. because hard-working middle- class families are rooting for success. the affordable care act gives people who have been stuck with sky high premiums because of pre-existing conditions the chance to get affordable insurance for the first time. this law means that women can finally find terms that doesn't charge them higher premiums than men for the same care. and everyone who already has health insurance, whether through your employer, medicare or medicaid, will keep the medicaid -- will keep the benefits and protections at this law has already put into place. 3 million more young adults have insurance on their parents fans

plans because of the informal care act. more than six people on medicare have saved an original $1000 on the prescription medicine because of the affordable care act. last year, more than 8 million americans received half $1 billion in refunds from their insurers because of the affordable care act. and for tens of millions of women, preventive care like mammograms and birth control are free because of the affordable care act. that is all part of this law and it is here to stay. he did not fight so hard for this reform for so many years just to build a website can we did it to free millions of american families from the awful fear that one illness or injury to yourself or your child might cost you everything you have worked so hard to build good we did it to cement to the principles that, in this country, the security of health care is not the privilege of a fortunate few but a right for everyone to enjoy. we have already delivered on part of the promise and we will

not rest until the work is done. thanks. and have a great weekend. >> hey, there. i am fred upton, chairman of the house energy and commerce committee. has been active in crafting solutions to improve health care for the american people as well as conducting oversight of the president's health care law. over the past year, we have become all too the troubled rollout of the law and his broken promises. this deadline delayed and special waivers and now website crashes. this week, four of the lead contractors responsible for the troubled healthcare.gov website testified about what went wrong and next week we will hear directly from the health and human services director kathleen sebelius. this bites -- despite hundreds of millions of dollars, the website still does not work for most. at a time when we can do everything from ordering a pizza, flowers, airline tickets,

banking, paying bills, they expect the same reliable service from healthcare.gov and it is still not ready for prime time. over the months leading up to the actual response, top officials in lead contractors appeared before this committee. they looked us in the eye and assured us repeatedly that everything was on track. except that it wasn't. the broken healthcare.gov website has captured the nation's attention. but this is more than a website problem. we are also concerned about what happens next. will enrollment which is become provider payment glitches? willi patients show up at a doctor or hospital only to find out they are not in a system? and will personal information that americans provide as part of the enrollment losses really be safe from cyber hackers and identity theft?

oversight is not about blame -- it is about accountability and transparency. and it's about fairness for the american public. so in a few short months, families across the country will be subject to penalties under the law's individual mandate. how can the administration punish innocent americans by forcing them to buy a product that many cannot afford from a system that simply doesn't work here at and what about the -- work? and what about the promises that health care costs would go down and that americans could keep their health plan if they like them no matter what? the reality and committees across the country is that premiums will be much higher. for some, as high as 400%. and millions of americans are receiving unwelcome notices that their plans are being terminated. believe it or not, more people are receiving cancellation notices in just three states that are applying in all 50 states. that is not what health reform

promised. and in the past few days, the bipartisan chorus has been growing to delay the and vigil mandate, to delay the penalties that americans would face for being unable to purchase insurance through this broken system. that is the good news. the business mandate was delayed and it is only fair that individuals and families receive the same treatment. and likewise, we should look for bipartisan solutions to allow americans to keep their current insurance can after all, that was president of,'s solemn promise to ring the -- president obama's solemn promise during the health care debate. this is a matter of fairness for all. if you are facing hardship as a result of the law, we want to hear from you. so please go to www.gop.gov/ shareyourstory.

>> those were the weekly addresses from president obama and fred upton talking about the health care law's implementation. and on to mars newsmakers, we will hear from -- we will hear more from the congressman from michigan. you can watch that interview tomorrow at 10:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. eastern here on c-span. >> up next, the communicators with competitive carriers -- >> last week -- the late representative bill young died recently. tributes on the floor came from both democrats and republicans.

this is about 40 minutes. >> the house has heard of the death of honorable c. w. bill young, that a committee of the speakers of the house together with such members of the senate as maybe joint the appointed to attend the funeral. resolved that the sergeant at arms of the house be authorized and directed to take such steps as may be necessary for carrying out the provisions of these resolutions -- resolutions and be paid out of applicable accounts of the house. resolved that the clerk communicate these resolutions to the senate and transmit a copy thereof to the family of the

deceased. resolved that when the house returns today that it were adjourns as a mark of respect to the deceased. >> without objection, the resolution is agreed to an motion to reconsider is laid on the table. for what purpose does the gentleman of new york seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent that they may be considered to be the first sponsor of hr 2248, a bill introduced by markey of massachusetts. >> about objection, so ordered. pursuant to clause eight of rule 20, to suspend the rules on what they recorded vote or the -- are ordered.

all on which the votes anchors objection under clause six of rule 20. any record vote on the postponed notion will be taken later. >> to name the medical center in florida as the c.w. bill young department of veteran affairs medical center. >> hr 3302, a bill to name the bay pines department affairs medical center in florida at the c.w. bill young department of veterans affairs medical center. >> pursuant to the rule, the gentlemen from florida, esther miller, and the gentlewoman from florida, ms. brown, each will controlled way minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from florida. >> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members five remarks and include any

extraneous material that they have on hr 3302. mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. >> the gentleman is recognized. >> thank you very much, mr. speaker. today is bittersweet as we mark both the passing of a congressional stalwart, chairman c.w. bill young and name the main pints medical center in his honor. mr. speaker, while the rock numbers themselves may seek volumes for his dedication to america, it is his personal qualities that i admired the most. when i came to congress in 2001, bill young was one of the first

members that welcomed me here, it was on this floor in this chamber that bill young introduced me to the members of this house the night i was sworn in. since then, i came to regard him not only as a mentor, not as a colleague, but a friend, a personal friend. chairman young served the 13th district of florida and the people of the united states for over 42 years. he was the senior member of the florida original delegation and was the senior republican in both the house and in the senate. counting his ears and the

florida legislature, bill young served over 50 years in public service and worked with eight presidents. bill will be most remembered for his devotion to america's defense and especially to the men and the women in the armed forces. having served in uniform for 15 years at the number of the national guard and reserves, bill was the go to guy on defense issues here in the house.

he dedicated his legislative and personal energies to improve the quality of life or the men and the women who serve, and as a result, those who wear the uniform and face our foes have improved housing today, better medicare care, increase pay, and the best equipment. members know bill best for his work as chairman of the house appropriations committee from 1999 to 2005, and he continued to serve as chairman of the

subcommittee of defense until this time of his passing. but bill young was much more than a defense expert. he has also been a leading advocate for increased medical research. bill worked to double medical research funding and funding to increase immunization rates for preschoolers, to improve public health programs, and to find cures for parkinson's and alzheimer's disease. just one example -- the c. w. bill young marrow donor recruitment and research program registry lists more than 9 million volunteer donors for patients with leukemia and other life-threatening diseases. that simple lists has provided the gift of life to more than 50,000 individuals. to completely describe the contributions of a man who served in this body for over 42 years would take hours, so with that, mr. speaker, on behalf of the entire florida delegation and all those who knew and served with him in this house and in the other body, i offer our most sincere condolences to his wife, beverly, and his sons rob, billy, and patrick. he was your husband, and he was your father. to us, bill was a friend. we will miss him dearly. mr. speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. >> the gentlelady from florida is recognized. >> thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself as much time as i may consume. one of my favorite songs is let the work i've done speak for me. i rise today to pay tribute to chairman bill young, whose passing we mourn and whose dedication american serviceman is well known to floridians as well as to all who served in the house of representatives. taking care of our nation men and women in uniform was his passion.

he often called them kids because he cared for them as deeply as they were his family. chairman young was an officer and a gentleman. he served for nine years in the american national guard. during his decade in congress, he and his wife, beverly, regularly visited the combat troops in florida and here in bethesda. they have arranged travel for military family members of those who are having trouble. here in the house at the appropriations committee in any other way he could find, he was tireless in his work on behalf of serviceman, veterans, and their families. i worked with him when we were having to finish a new courthouse. this was just after the oklahoma

city bombing, and all of the new security requirements that was added to protect the building and the people in them. the project was $9 million over budget, but the chairman came to the longest town hall meeting ever held here on the capitol. everyone had to say the chairman was a gentleman as always and wanted what was best for the people of florida regardless of party. this was the case also when it came to funding for research. chairman young knew how important cutting-edge research was and making it a pro-ready to find the funding to help future generations of americans. every year, bill young was a keynote speaker at the memorial day program in bay pines he worked with gerald ford and the appropriations committee in 1976 to replace their original hospital building. at one point, he was a far as to personally show the president where the building was and how badly it was leaking. he was very proud of the new hospital, which opened in 1983. he was thrilled when they named the road encircling at the bill young road.

the va medical center at at bay pines has services to complete, but in addition their service work character worse, dental service, extension care, and service for seniors along with programs that help homeless vets. in addition, the women's veterans health care program at bay pines focuses on wellness, education, preventative health care, disease management, and care for the emotional well- being of women veterans. today, we will go one step further and honor the man who made the va medical center at bay pines a reality. today, we take a step of naming the whole facility after bill young. it is a most appropriate tribute to name the center whose mission it is to coordinate the care for wounded or men and women who serve their life. mr. speaker, as we say goodbye to our friend and colleague, chairman bill young, with this bill, we could honor his service in the way and he would appreciate most deeply. have his name associated daily with the highest level of care for our military veterans. i want to thank committee chairman miller for bringing this forward, and i urge all of our parties to join me in supporting it. mr. speaker, i reserve the balance of my time.

>> they gentleman from florida is recognized. >> i would like to yield one minute to ms. ros-lehtinen. >> the gentlewoman from florida is recognized. >> thank you so much, and i'm so pleased of the gentleman from florida, chairman miller, has given me some time, and i'm so pleased to support his bill that he has gotten the entire florida delegation working in a bipartisan manner to honor this good man and warm friend, congressman bill young. bill was a true patriot and a tenacious public servant, dedicating his life to his constituents. as you heard from some of our previous speakers, his accomplishments are so varied and many, creating a national bone marrow registry of improving the quality of life for active duty personnel, our national guard, our reserves,

veterans. dissecting thousands of jobs in his area, preserving mcgill air force base, improving florida's environment. these are just some of bill's many of consciousness. he was always willing to lend a helping hand to members of our entire state delegation with projects that were him portman in our local community. for example, he helps me to find the funds to dredge the miami river. >> i give the lady an additional 30 seconds. >> thank you. to help the air force base after

he was devastated by hurricane andrew, but more importantly, he was the consummate gentleman. he was principled, honest, maintaining civility with his colleagues, a trait that we no longer honor as we should. bill was an example for all of us here in congress. it was my privilege and my high honor to serve with him. what a great privilege. i think the gentleman for yielding me be time. >> time is expired. the gentleman from florida reserves. the gentlelady from florida is recognized. >> thank you. i would like to yield three minutes to the gentleman from maryland, the whip mr. hoyer. >> the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. >> thank you for yielding.

bill young was my friend. bill young was a gentle man in every sense of the world. bill young was an example for us all. i will have the privilege of speaking on thursday at his request at his funeral. the bill and i served on the appropriations committee for 23

years together. i left when i became majority leader. bill young was, as i said, a gentle man, who cared about each and every individual in this house. more than that, he cared for each and every person who served in uniform in our armed forces. he and beverly displayed that, as congressman miller has said, on a weekly, daily basis. i am a democrat, bill was a republican. it is not make any difference. he was an american, i was an american, and we serve our country together. no one served a better than bill young. he chose to see our differences as slight, and our common purpose as great. he always chose civility over partisanship. he was a skilled legislator on behalf of the people of florida, on behalf of his country. on behalf of the members of the armed forces, and the defense of

this country. he was a champion of veterans and their families, all of whom, where everybody lives, he viewed as his constituents. this bill to rename the va hospital in bay pines florida, which i am proud to cosponsor, is a fitting tribute to his devotion to our veterans and our troops. though he represented longer than any member of the house in this industry, he was originally from a coal mining town in pennsylvania. it was there he learned many lessons of the hardships of family and to learn that what they need would be in their

reach. he never forgot that. he was a great member of this body. a very powerful member of this body. an extraordinary influential american. but to all of us, he was built. to all those he came in contact, he was bill. he was a person who understood the needs, fears, aspirations, hopes of his people and the people of our country. my thoughts are with beverly, was bill young's family, the people of florida's 13th district. this house has lost a great member. i yield back the balance of my time. >> the gentleman from florida is recognized. >> thank you, mr. speaker.

i like to yield one minute to mr. mica. >> it is absolutely fitting that we take this step and name our veterans hospital and the west coast of florida after a great american, a patriot, a hero for our veterans, bill young. probably more than anyone in the house of representatives of congress, i have known bill young, i think longer. he and i were both aides to the first republic and congressman since the civil war, bill kremer. he was an aide before i was, but we met together and work

together more than 40 years ago. so i rise tonight not only as a colleague but as a personal friend and political ally of a great human being, someone who put his heart and soul into this position, who loved our servicemen and women, and his great legacy will be all he has done to honor their memory, and tonight we honor his memory with renaming bay pines veteran hospital for bill young, my friend.

i reserve the balance of my time. >> the gentleman from florida is recognized. >> thank you. at this time, i would like to yield three minutes of the gentleman from georgia, mr. bishop. >> the gentleman is recognized. >> i rise to rename the bay pines veterans affairs medical center in florida to the c. w. bill young department veterans affairs medical center. i am honored to join over 200 of my house colleagues as an original cosponsor of this bipartisan legislation, a great tribute to one of our dearest colleagues. indeed, bill young will be forever known as one of the strongest supporters of our military and veterans in the history of this congress. his unyielding support of our military and veterans is legendary. likewise, he was a true champion for his district and a fountain of knowledge about the chronicles of the u.s. house of representatives. bill young will be missed in washington as well as in florida. he along with late congressman jack murtha, were not only great friends and mentors to me but their wives, beverly and joyce, were also friends of my wife, vivian. chairman murtha and chairman young were neither democrat nor republican when it came to our national defense. regardless of which was the chairman or ranking member of the subcommittee, the men and women of america's military would be taken care of. i am proud to have served as a member of the house appropriations subcommittee on defense under both of these great leaders. bill young's death, the nation has truly lost one of the few remaining statesman. our thoughts and prayers are with beverly and the entire family. congress and our nation have lost one of its greatest statesman. i have lost a dear friend and a mentor. while we could use every word in every language spoken by mankind, we will not have enough words combined to adequately think bill young for his service. but i am pleased to join my colleagues in passing this resolution to rename the bay pines medical center in florida the c. w. bill young department

of veterans affairs medical center. it has been said that you make your living by what you get. you make your life by what you give. bill young gave so much to so many for so long. he will be greatly missed. i reserve the balance of my time. >> the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from florida is recognized. >> i would announce tonight that we had 379 original cosponsors of this piece of legislation.

>> thank you so much. 379 cosponsors. what a testament to her and what a wonderful man. mr. speaker, i rise today to support this legislation. over the past five decades, chairman young selflessly serve florida and the tampa bay area, leading many initiatives to promote economic growth, create jobs, of which his contributions to the military and veterans in particular are immeasurable. in the 1970's, the chairman played a significant role in winning critical funding for the bay pines medical center, which allows the facilities to support almost 100,000, mr. speaker, 100,000 of our heroes in our area today. with this funding come up bay pines was able to increase the size of its campus, replace the