202-585-3887. you can also get a hold of us on facebook.com/cspan. twitter. the hash tag is cspan chat. california.in let's go over to milton in san jose. c-span.n what did you think? >> yes, day watch the speech and disappointed both that the reforms seemed more of a band aid than substantive, and there are so many legal qualifiers about when the and wordske place like insignificant cases or in criminal cases or where there's a significant threat. there's always these qualifiers, concern is that he didn't address how i feel the n.s.a. has been polluting the internet. falsee cases putting out back door access -- >> milton, what would you have heard theave

president say today >> what would you have liked to have heard the president say? >> my biggest concern with the edward snowden thing, which he notissed i saying it was it right disclosures and wanted to acknowledge that edward snowden tried internally to blow the whistle and remind his peers about weaknesses administratives structure. that is one of the main reasons that he did what he did. he needed an outside perspective. to be honest i do not think our has done structure this very well. they'd need to acknowledge they should talk to us the whole time. >> we appreciate the time.

we are going to indiana in a moment. if you missed the speech this afternoon, we will have it for you at 8:00 eastern in its entirety. though ahead. about: i had a comment the last caller was talking about snowden, and the president dismissed that kind of. i feel we should be doing something about snowden rather than just let him take asylum in russia. there is not much we can do about it. a stretch of been our relationship. he is a traitor. -- il he should have just know this speech was not about snowden, that i think he should be hanged for treason. >> we will move on.

adam writes on our facebook page, i like how he walked through history and uses those reminders to persuade people to think about increased colleges on americans is the central. wow. we will go to andy in massachusetts. you are on our line for republicans. caller: i think he did a good job by speaking, but i do not plan he has a smart enough for what he would do in terms of handling this. thanks very much. we will go to occur the -- rogersville, alabama. you are on our line for independents. caller: he tried to back step and cover everything up.

he is opening a can of worms, not knowing what everybody is doing out there. trying to smooth it over, but they need to sit down and look at it. they ain't going to stop it. they are going to keep going and going and going and they are just going to hide it at present under the table, but they are still going to do the same thing. that was a good speech he gave, but if people really believe it, let them believe it. if they do not, they do not. it will always happen, it will get worse and worse and worse. the government will keep trying to get involved in everything. knowing about everything. that ain't right. host: we appreciate the call. needs mores accountability and oversight

disclosure. do not want more cia of the 1950's. cookie,ve on now to out new mexico. suzanne, you are on c-span. caller: thanks for taking my call. i think the president made a point and i was pleased with the speech when he said that we needed a national discourse on this topic. among all the topics around these days, certainly this topic , and i hoperving lots more will join the discourse as we try to speak about that balance between surveillance and security and on ourother hand protection of rights as citizens. i thought it was pretty good. he laid out many things that deserved reflection and thought in the coming days. thanks so much for listening. host: thank you for your call.

you may have noticed, we noticed a lot of the members of the relevant house and senate intelligence committees, pat leahy, congressman rogers from this chicken, senator -- from michigan, senator feinstein. here's what senator paul said. while i'm urged the president is addressing the spying program because of pressure, i'm disappointed in the details. the fourth amendment requires an onividual warrant based probable cause before the government can search phone records and e-mails. that is part of the rest release. two montgomery, -- let's go to montgomery, illinois. james, you are on c-span. you there? we will go down to philadelphia. hi, you are on c-span. aboutould like to talk the president speaking, which is

prettyate attendance was disappointing, given their recent raises. i agree with the president, not doing too much about snowden. said, it wast he reminiscent of school when i was told i had good ideas, but not enough supporting facts, and that is what i got from the speech. granted, it is an initial changes will be made speech. --t: what grade would begin would you give the president? overall -- >> overall? >> a minus. >> we have the speech again at

8:00 tonight. in two hours at 2:00 eastern, we will have live coverage from the brookings institution am a discussion on the president's speech, and you will have a chance to watch and see what other folks are saying. tyler, texas, line for democrats. you are on c-span. to say ifwould like the president wants to know what is happening with our government and things he should take on the system, [indiscernible] getting our information, because i myself have heard things about the spying software, whatever, that people are using that on humans and it works. just so you know. it makes me nervous to say that out loud on the air, but it works. something about germanym and i will leave it at that. thank you. host: thanks for your call. on the facebook page, david

writes and says israel gets more from the nsa than our own intelligence does, and we have between from a caller who says obama reminds me of the great quotation, he who sacrifices freedom for great security deserves neither. host: let's go to california. how are you? caller: i thought the speech was quite good. i thought it was very informative. i believe as a general public we do not on a day-to-day basis concern ourselves enough with history, with data am a learning, and this is a good exercise for us as a country. as fact as the individual liberty is concerned, macy's knows more about the dandy nsa desperate nordstrom knows more

about me than the nsa does. anything that is used digital or plastic come as we say in the old days, is shared with every other corporation in the country related to pay the fee. as far as cyber security, is concerned, the government and fornsa has been calling americans and american businesses to secure their data, to secure their information. some companies choose to spend the money and some do not. other countries are hacking into shutting themd down, just to test for the coming cyber wars. government,g to our let's not get involved in that. americans are going to have a totally different perspective when their power is shut down from some foreign servers. host: we will move along and trying to get a few more folks. from pennsylvania, power line for independents.

what is your reaction? caller: typical obama abstractions. he went around the issue, as always. google, which i think will be the largest threat over the last five or 10 years. i do not think there is a more dangerous shift in culture than what google glass will bring with surveillance and emerging corporations with the state. if there needs to be a discourse, that needs to be around the issues. american ending, exceptionalism, i think he is so far from reality that right now it is pretty much anyone would agree who is paying close attention to the news and to culture that right now america has no identity.

i am 20 years old, and a lot of my friends, we talk about this all the time, it is an abstraction. we do not know who we are as americans right now. host: thanks for your call. baltimore, maryland, line for democrats. hi. are you there? we will move along to goodyear, arizona. hi, susan. caller: thank you for taking my call. i appreciate your tvs show and watch it every day. today i did watch the whole show a president obama, but my concern is how do we know we could trust the ones that they hired to protect us? can somebody tell us what is going on? because they have had in the irs, in the government, people that have criminal records -- how do we know we can trust these people, and who is it that is going to be doing it? that is all i need to go. host: thanks for your call.

more tweets coming in. obama, you just made a harmful excuse to keep secrets from more americans. nick? caller: hi, i am here. thented to say that american constitution right now does not mean anything no more, and it is more proof the president can get up there and just kind of put snowden to the back earner and only touch on so snowden is definitely a hearer. the whole thing with these guys lying in congress to begin with, but the nsa, when they get to the question, were they spying, and the constitutional rights, they lied blatantly. everybody is looking to the president to say something on

this matter. everybody knows the constitution was violated. we will continue doing it, people should look at who is in charge because it is not the president of the united states anymore. that host: is all i got to say. host:appreciate the call. this tweet says president obama on nsa spying, we are listening to all your calls, but nsa are good people. quoteson facebook benjamin franklin to the effect they that give up the central liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. what did you think? caller: i watched it, and i think the speech was lacking in the substantive affirmation. basicallyent is commenting on everything except for the program. it was released recently that over one million text messages

of americans' telecommunications is acquired via these nsa programs. then he goes on to say not much information on personal private data is collected at all. host: you called on our democrats line. did you vote for the president the last two times? yes, i did.t: ♪ host: what would you have liked to have heard today? caller: it would have suited the public if he talked about whether he believes, whether he agrees on the fact that snowden should have clemency and the fact that he is the only reason why we are having these conversations in the first place. without snowden, we would never have had a catalyst to discuss many of the programs that were being too secret for public discourse. host: we have time for one more

call. this time to the republican friend. you're on c-span. caller: yes, basically, [indiscernible] at the end of the day, the president's speech, i would give how he is going to correct the nsa. people do not understand each cell phone company holds your metadata regardless. [indiscernible] notyou send it to and do send it to. if you do not want your personal business out, do not e-mail, do not text. at the end of the day, nsa was made to protect us in the whole united states from terrorism. we may have gone overboard by connecting all of the data, but

your phone company connects everything that you do. the government then takes it from them and insert google into it. that is the biggest question he did not answer that i had a question with, the question about the overseers. no one was an overseer, was watching him to see if he could take something out, and give it to someone else. are watching and who is going to watch them,? host: we will leave it right aree, norfolk, as we running out of time. we will have the speech again at 8:00 tonight. at 2:00 this afternoon, a live discussion on the speech from the brookings institution. you can feel free to call any day. our c-span page on facebook or

on twitter, the hash tag # cspanchat. lots of time throughout the day for your phone calls. earlier john kerry had a news conference with the canadian foreign minister and the mexican foreign minister. we will show you that now. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> good morning. nice to be here with everybody and i am delighted to welcome my friends and north american counterparts. we are happy to have them in washington today. i have had a chance to meet bilaterally a number of times and theh the secretary minister, but this is the first

time we have been able to meet all three of us since i became secretary of state. i'm grateful to both of them for making the trip here, and i hope to visit their countries, both of them, very, very soon. during my years in the senate and certainly since becoming secretary, i have often found about howabsolute awe extraordinary this continent really is. while we often wind up traveling to troubled spots in the world, the truth is that worth america is a remarkable, remarkable three very important and powerful countries that share values and interests and are operating on those values and interests every single day. we are three nations separated

by peaceful borders. we are neighbors, we are partners, and we come together to confront the full range of challenges that we face, and believe me, this is something that is not every day every where in the world today. north american they nations are promoting democracy and shared values at home and around the globe. we encourage daily our cooperation on matters of international peace and security. we work to gather on nonproliferation, on syria among middle east peace come on a host of different challenges to our security, and we are also collaborating to address all of them more effectively than any of us could do alone. that is the power of north america and this relationship. through initiatives like the north america-central american

security dialogue, we are improving security throughout the western hemisphere and beyond, and we are reducing the impact of natural disasters, providing assistance in the face of health am a humanitarian challenges. we have launched trilateral initiatives like the north american plan for animal and pandemic influenza, which was critical during the h one and one outbreak of 2009 and remains intact today in order to help us address similar challenges should they arise at any moment we are taking steps to support economic growth that is inclusive, shared. a few weeks ago we marked the 20th anniversary of nafta. and i think we have learned a couple of important lessons that can help inform the vision of nafta. the first lesson is free trade

works. in a world where economic policy is foreign policy him a free trade is a key ingredient for shared prosperity, for shared growth, and share security. every single day the united states does more than $3.4 naftan of trade in our partnership. that is about 1/3 of all the trading we do. it is done between this partnership. $1 trillion a year. that is more trade than we engage with brazil annually, and each month we do more trade than we do with india annually. to give you a sense of the vitality of the partnership. over the past 20 years we have opened up a new north american marketplace.

we have integrated supply chains and reimagined entire industries from agriculture to airspace. today north america is far more than the sum of three economies. it is the collective output of what has become a fully integrated manufacturing center. if you buy a car in mexico, it may well have been assembled in canada and contained made in america parts. there are workers in kansas putting the finishing touches on aircraft that contains fuselages assembled in mexico and engines built in canada. this kind of economic integration is benefiting all three of our nations economically, and has also improved living standards and working conditions across the board. i will tell you because i was involved in the nafta debate in the united states senate. i remember how intense that debate was. it divided america.

we could never really have envisioned even the best arguments what has happened in those 20 years. the second lesson that we can learn from the past couple of isades is that globalization not slowing down anytime soon. and no matter how much there is some dislocation, and we acknowledge there can be, the fact is that no political leader or country can put that genie back in the bottle. when i joined my senators in supporting and passing nafta, we did not do it because it was easy. we did because we believed it was a risk worth taking, and it has proven true. nafta was at the vanguard of the holy interconnected world -- wholly interconnected world that we face today, and nobody has any way of transforming the realities of this desire of people everywhere to have better jobs, more jobs, or education, or opportunity that comes with

that opening up. yes i'm a globalization can be a challenge. but it really has meant that our countries have to be more dynamic. we have to be more competitive. we have to be more innovative. that is not always easy. globalization is an enormous if we cany, and take advantage of it as we build on the strong partnership, we believe it will help all of us to provide better opportunity and more security to our citizens. if we want to compete, we actually have to make it even easier to trade, easier for people to invest in our countries. we talked bout that this morning. we talked about how we can improve the transporter movement of both goods and people. we talked about how the transpacific partnership good particularly have an impact on

the global economy and also be a normal sleep beneficial to each of us -- we enormously beneficial to each of our economies. if nations want to compete, the united states, and the that come a and mexico -- the united states, canada, and mexico can partners.is as that includes the subject of energy. i look forward to discussion for the opportunities for energy cooperation, and we talked about that today, ways in which we can address the enormous challenge of climate change, which we all agree in our nations must be addressed, but also how we address the question of taking --antage of fast resources of vast resources we have in this continent, bring greater inergy opportunity to citizens, but do so in ways that are environmentally sustainable and responsible. of mexico president

will host obama and prime minister harper for the north american leaders' meeting. the lessons of the past will be at the forefront of our minds. needs to fundamentally be on the future, and that is were it will be come on the growth of our markets, the strength of our partnership, the health and well-being of our people, and the security of our continent for years to come. mr. secretary? you, and good morning to all. thank you, secretary kerry. thank you, minister. this has been a very good meeting for mexico. it has been an opportunity to talk about issues that are relevant to the region. at the outset i would like to recognize from mexico the long hours, the long days that risk he ishree, the taking to construct a better world, and i think those risks have paid off and mexico recognizes that hard work.

we had a good meeting this morning. i would like to thank the members of the press. [speaking in spanish] >> i would like to thank mexican and foreign correspondents for their attendance. said,secretary kerry division of 21st century north america, we will work to become the most competitive and most dynamic region and the world. hostll be honored to president obama and prime minister harper in february. topics on howany to work, to increase our prosperity, our leadership, our international engagement, and the opportunity of citizens in

the north american region. he president has said believes 21st north america is called on to become the most competitive region and the world. harper andter president obama also share this. we are willing to make this work. as the secretary said, and the minister believes, we have shared values. we have a working partnership that has worked for the benefit of our people. region that enjoys an important number of competitive advantage is going forward. labore a competitive costs. we have huge transportation and logistic advantages. have [indiscernible] in human capital. time -- a new part- paradigm. [indiscernible]

framework that has worked and has worked well. as remarked the nafta 20th and for virtue, it is important to see that the size of the resources. as this press conference is million, more than 2 dollars of goods are being traded every minute. behind that trade there has been job creation and perspired he for the region. mexico looks forward to partake in an effort to advance prosperity in the region. waysow we must find news to go forward. we need to collaborate more on education, science, technology him and innovation. we have the opportunity to work gather in addressing regional concerns, engaging with central america because it is a latin american region. politicale have the

framework and political will that is in place to implement the system that we have taken. it is a north american idea that is a very good friend of mexico. mexico, the u.s., and canada are working together to spread their regional community, and that commitment was reaffirmed this morning. again, thank you, secretary kerry, and thank you, minister, for your partnership in the september. >> thank you very much, secretary meade. >> it is a pleasure for me to be here today and to celebrate the good partnership and good relations between our two countries. we had great discussions today celebrating 20 years of nafta and the huge and significant economic growth and trade we have seen between our three countries.

we also have seen the growth of our political relations. to work together to see more jobs, or opportunity, what we can do to make our economies more competitive, what we can do to boost income, job creation in all three countries. nafta has been an unqualified success, and one of the side effects is the strength and political relationship between all three countries where on issue after issue after issue there is a strength in partnership were not only we're getting agether, but lot farther faster than any of us could have ever hoped 20 years ago. we had an opportunity to discuss security and management, infrastructure. we had the opportunity to talk about regulatory cooperation, all things that can help used job creation. this remains a significant priority for canada.

we look forward to continued preparation for a successful summit. we appreciate the significant either ship from the president of -- the significant leadership from the president of next ago and the speed of reforms that his first base place in year in office. remarkable. we havd a strong relationship with the culver road administration. calderonthe administration. i want to thank you, john, for the significant american leadership, with respect to the palestinian -- israeli conflict. i look forward to visiting with and to do what we can to support your effort to seek a resolution to one off if not the most intractable issues in the world. your leadership as well with respect to trying to bring a political solution and and and to the violence -- end of the and his war onad

his people, we will support you in those common values and efforts that we strongly support. thank you very much. >> thank you very much. >> the first question will be from michael jordan from "the new york times." >> question for secretary kerry. after you became secretary of state, you made the point repeatedly that it was important s calculation to achieve a political solution that you needed. a year later, it is clear that the assad regime believes its position is stronger than ever. in his letter to the united nations, the syrian foreign minister who will be leaving the suggest that the purpose is not to discuss the political transition. he said some point in the invitation the syrian government

received are in conflict with the legal and political position of the state of syria. my question is, how can you expect to make progress toward a political transition that you needed to if the assad government does not accept the purpose of the conference, which is what it's letter suggests? have you been in contact with the syrian government over the past 24 hours that it accepts the purpose of the meeting? doesn't the letter mean more pressure needs to be brought to bear on the assad government in order to make political headway? thank you. >> thank you very much, michael. directly i addressed the revisionism of the syrian regime in its effort to try to diverge the purpose -- divert the purpose that will not be successful. more than 30 nations will us 30 nations will

possible, all of whom must be to thecated -- committed geneva went communicate. you were in paris the other day when the foreign minister of russia stepped up and reiterated that the purpose of the conference is the implementation of the geneva i communicate. -- communique. nobody would have believed that assad would have given up his weapons. but he did. the reason he did was his patrons came to understand that he had to. i believe as we begin to get the in thisnd begin to get process it will become clear there is no political solution whatsoever if assad is not discussing a transition and if he thinks he is going to be part of that future. it is not going to happen. the people who are the opponents of this regime will never ever

stop. there will be a low-grade insurgency at least and at worst potentially at the level of a civil war if it continues because they will not stop. where not out of options with respect -- we are not out of options with respect to what we can do to further change the calculation, and we have made that clear to the russian foreign minister and others, and other players short of an ability to be able to have an impact here. they can bluster, they can protest, they can put out distortions. the bottom line is we are going to geneva to implement geneva i. if assad does not do that, he will invite greater response in various ways from various. -- from various people over a period of time.

i am not particularly surprised that he is trying to die for this. he has been trying to do this for months, trying to make him the protector of serious against extremists, when he has even been funding those extremists, ding purposely ce territory to them to make the argument that he is somehow the protector. nobody will be full. we will not be full by this process. fooled by this process. the foreign minister labral has stated that he is supporting this communicate and the government must support that com munique. since russia is one of the primary benefactors of the regime, russians have a high stake in making sure that assad understands what the parameters of this negotiation are. question.

thank you. you discussed how to improve the transit of goods here in north america. many people in the u.s. have been asking to update nafta, to advantage of recent reforms in mexico. would your government be willing to update nafta or be willing to open it up formally? somealso to include issue -- you, how dorry, for you respond to those who believe that at some point the u.s. should include canada and mexico in the negotiations if only to avoid future conflicts between the nafta rules and whatever you end up agreeing to with europeans? >> i would like each of my

guests to address this also. over the last 20 years, as i mentioned, we have developed this incredible network of trade agreements in the western hemisphere. to open upg wanted this benefits. i think stepping up all of us to tpp is a critical component to moving through next year post-nafta. you do not have to open up nafta to achieve what we are trying to achieve. there are plenty of ways for us in cooperation -- and we discussed a lot of them this morning with respect to borders, with respect to regulations, with respect to energy cooperation, technology, .nnovation, investment there are a host of things that we can move forward on that will take us to the next level without having to go back and reopen it. i think we are well engaged and looking forward to a much more

robust relationship. what we did do today was set down a series of specific items that we will follow up on quickly so that these can be the our presidents and prime minister will end up negotiating in february. today's meeting halls out the prospect that this -- holds out the prospect that this can be beneficial. >> we believe nafta has been an unqualified success. the transpacific partnership trade negotiation which all three of us are in offers of us the opportunity to strengthen the trilateral partnership, and we are going to use that opportunity to do so. >> nafta has worked well on many levels. in the last 20 years, trade in the region multiply by three.

investment in the region multiply by eight. mexico is now the third trading partner of the u.s. and canada. we are the second and the sixth largest markets of the u.s. markets respectively. extent is the first market for exports from arizona, california, and texas. we are the second largest export market for other 20 states. put the numbers in perspective, exports to mexico from the u.s. were larger than exports to china and japan together. they were larger than the sum of exports to germany, france, poland, and the u.k. put together. how we have an opportunity to deal. i agree with secretary kerry and what the minister said that it is not necessary to reopen nafta, but we have to construct the idea of a dynamic north

america. the three economies standing before you today is about 1/ economy.world's we are the largest exporters of most advanced industries. we have the obligation to review how the economic process is going in such a way as to remove any obstacles for trade, investment, and economic for severity, to be -- economic prosperity to be an advantage. what we agreed to today will allow us to have an agenda to have mechanisms that will allow for the commitments that we can reach to be fully implemented. terms of the trade relationship with europe, at some point we will have three bilateral trade agreements with the european union.

it is important for mexico that those are the benefit of the north american region. we think that is in the best interest of canada and u.s. as well, and we will work to ensure those negotiations further increase the north american competitiveness with a view eventually to having a more integrated perspective from north america and the new european union -- and the european union. >> thank you. eight question from the canadian press. >> my question is on a bilateral matter. -u.s. issue, the case of pipeline. last february secretary kerry you said you were hoping to be in a position to offer a decision on keystone in the near future. it has been almost a year. since then the canadian government has said it would not take no for an answer on keystone. this week your canadian interlocutor is in washington and has repeatedly asked for a decision because apparently the

uncertainty is becoming untenable for the oil industry. answer youryou to canadian friend. >> i have to do it according to process andrative the rules and regulations under which i have to operate. i think he understands that. in thecurrently engaged environmental impact statement analysis, and an analysis will be made with respect to the national interest alternately, and we are just not at that point yet. i have not received it. they have not finished it. there were questions raised in all the public comment peri od, and those comments have necessitated appropriate answers. the public has a role in this. we are all accountable to our publics. democratic process the man's we

do that. we are doing that, and i can promise my friend in canada that all the appropriate effort is being put into trying to get , anddone, effectively rapidly, and my hope is that before long that analysis will be available. in my work against. -- then my work begins. >> john and i have had discussions with this in the past. we will be meeting later today. this is a tremendously important project for the future from the perspective of the canadian economy. 26 months ago to clinton explained the concerns that the administration had with the apple for in nebraska -- with the aquifer in nebraska. the straight realigned -- the state realigned the of pipeline. we hope the final report is out in short order.

that the administration will be in a position to make a positive decision. this is a great project for the future economic prosperity of canada. there are a lot of jobs here for the united states. a great project that will increase the energy security of our closest friend and ally. we obviously want the report ath a positive decision, positive justice is and for job creation. >> thank you all, everyone. >> thank you very much. appreciate it. i think we are going out now. >> coming up at the top of the how, the house will gavel in for a pro forma session. this will take place as members

returned to their districts for the next week or so. we have that live for you in about 10 minutes on c-span. the big news coming out of washington today is the president's speech regarding changes to government surveillance programs. at 2:00, reaction to his remarks from the brookings institution. that panel includes a former cia analyst and british defense official. right here on c-span. we will show you the president's speech tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern. we'll show it after the house recesses us afternoon. "book tv" programming. robert gates is speaking at the constitution center in philadelphia later today him and you can watch his remarks live at 6:30 p.m. on our companion network c-span2. as we wait for the house to come in, we will show you some of today's "washington journal." we want to look

at the state of volunteerism in the united states. joining us for this discussion is wendy spencer, the ceo of the corporation for national and theunity service as well as founding director of the center for nonprofits and philanthropy at the urban institute in washington. let's start with you, wendy. the corporation for national and community service is a federal agency. we administer a senior grant. we engage 5 million americans in service. . host: are we a volunteering nation? guest: we are. our research tells us that one in four americans volunteers through an organization, even more informally.

host: elizabeth boris, these are charts, 64.5 million americans, one in four -- 7.9 billion hours in 2012. what kind of volunteering are we doing? >> all over the map, everything from direct services, providing food and shelter, to mentoring children, boy scout leaders, girl scout leaders, all across the board. health services, community services, active civic volunteering. host: is the u.s. unique? guest: i don't think so we're unique, but certainly in the scale of volunteering, we are far ahead of the crowd. host: why is that? guest: we have 1.6 million nonprofit organizations in this

country and we have an agency that is helping to promote and study and make volunteering visible. host: wendy, what are the volunteer activities? guest: the number one activity is fundraising. people like to raise money for causes they believe in. about 25% of volunteers, our research shows us, collecting, distributing or serving food second. just general labor, painting, building homes, packing supplies , things that nonprofits and organizations need help with. host: when you say fundraising, does that mean getting on the phone or hitting up your neighbors? guest: it starts at an early age. you mentioned selling girl scout cookies, which is what i did at a young age, all the way up to volunteering for your faith

organization, your charities you really believe in. our research tells us that if you volunteer, you are almost twice as likely to give to charity. our research says they also give to charity. host: two in three americans informally volunteer. what's the difference between formal and informal volunteering? guest: formal is through an organization. you go to a school or university and get into a mentoring program. informal volunteering can be taking your neighbor to get to the health clinic or providing

services your neighbors may need. with a population aging, there is more and more of this informal volunteering to help one another. host: if you like to participate in our conversation on volunteerism, the numbers are on your screen divided by region. if you are volunteer, we want to hear about your experience. how do you put a dollar value on volunteerism? guest: you do a survey and then you figure out how many hours people are volunteering and then you put a dollar value on it. research over the years has come up with something like a little over $19 an hour, and that blends in, both the administrative and soup kitchen work along with the pro bono lawyers and accountants, and we get this average number. host: what is that number?

guest: $22.14 this year. if you take the hours of americans volunteered in 2012, that is $175 billion in value. host: wendy, there are people sitting out here who say, we don't need a government organization to tell us to volunteer. guest: our agency, i consider a seed at the local level. we provide grants for americorps, for example. americans are recruiting volunteers who serve alongside them. part of the idea is not only will they provide direct service for a set amount of time and objectives over the year, but they will also recruit

volunteers to serve alongside them. when they graduate from their year of service, you have left behind a country of volunteers who will help the cause and even give money to the cause. host: what is the urban institute and what do you study their? guest: social science research institution. my center studies the nonprofit sector and philanthropy. we have the nation's databases. we are so happy that the corporation is in charge of the effort, because it was difficult to do these volunteering studies. we need the data on a regular basis. host: why? guest: it is an invisible part of the economy. to know the scope and dimensions and be able to promote it and

say there is a value to this, so people are encouraged to do it, that is what the data has enabled us to do. host: when you look at data supplied by the corporation, what surprised you the most? guest: two things. one, i'm happy to see the millennials' volunteerism is going up. when you look at the proportion who are working mothers, almost 40% -- who could be busier than a working mother? that is an indication that everybody can volunteer. host: look at those volunteer rates. 23.8%.nts,

parents of school-aged children, 33.5%. mothers.% working what kind of work are they doing? guest: lots of work, especially connected to the schools. a lot of these are serving and connected to the schools. our data does not tell us why, but i know when i was a parent of a school-age child i remember being very close to the community organizations and wanted to make sure my children were being raised in a quality community. host: how many hours a week do we volunteer? guest: about 50 hours a year. our seniors, almost 90 hours a year.

host: let's work in our callers as well. the first call is from grand rapids, michigan, on our volunteer line. hi. caller: hello. host: what kind of work do you do? have a rare disability, so since i've been out of work i've been volunteering for three years and i just had a question on the agencies and programs we volunteer for. why is it that they don't pay more attention to the moms of america that is volunteering when they're not able to work and not trying to assist us with finding a regular job that we can work? host: elizabeth, if you would address this. one of the charts the corporation puts out is volunteering among the unemployed. guest: the corporation has some

good data now on the benefits of volunteering for the unemployed, providing all kinds of opportunities to gain skills, which volunteering often enables folks to do, and builds a connection so people meet other folks and through those networks are able to secure employment. i am an example of that. i was a working mother, finishing my ph.d., and working -- we will breakaway at this point. that's take a look at the u.s. capitol. the house about to gavel in for a pro forma session. we might hear a short speech or two. as soon as they are ready, we will take you live to the house floor. the expected not to take that

long. then we will bring you the from earlierpeech today. let's go live inside the u.s. house of representatives here on c-span. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the chair lays before the house a communication from the speaker. the clerk: the speaker's rooms, measheds, january 17, 2014. i hereby appoint the honorable andy harris to act as speaker pro tempore on this day, signed,

john a. boehner, speaker of the house of representatives. the speaker pro tempore: the prayer will be offered by our chaplain, father conroy. chaplain conroy: let us pray. eternal god we give you thanks for giving us another day. we thank you once again that we, your creatures, can come before you and ask guidance for the men and women of this assembly. send your spirit of peace, honesty, and fairness during this week of constituent visits. may their ears and hearts be open to listen to the hopes and needs of those whom they represent. bless the people of this great nation with wisdom, knowledge, and understanding, that they might responsibly participate in our american democracy. please keep all who work for the people's house in good health, that they might faithfully fulfill the great responsibility

given them in their service to the work of the capitol. bless us this day and every day. may all that is done here this day be for your greater honor and glory. amen. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to section 4a of house resolution 45 , the journal of the last day's proceedings is approved. the chair will lead the house in the pledge of allegiance. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the chair lays before the house a communication. the clerk: the honorable the speaker, house of representatives, sir, pursuant to the permission granted in clause 2h of rule 2 of the rules of the u.s. house of representatives, the clerk received the following message from the secretary of the senate

on january 17, 2014, at 9:50 a.m., that the senate agreed to, without amendment, house concurrent resolution 74. that the senate concurred in the house amendment to the senate amendment h.r.h.r. 3547. with best wished, i am, signed, sincerely karen l. haas. the speaker pro tempore: pusuant to to clause 4 of rule 1, the following enrolled bill was signed by speaker pro tempore harris on friday, january 17, 2014. the clerk: h.r. 3547, making consolidated appropriations for the fiscal year ending september 30, 2014, and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to section 4b of house resolution 458, the house stands adjourned until 1:00 p.m. tuesday, january 21, 2014.

>> thank you very much. thank you. thank you so much. please, have a seat. public, an of our small secret surveillance committee born out of the sons of liberty was established in boston. the group's members included

paul revere. they would patrol the streets at night, reporting any signs that the british were preparing rates against america's early patriots. -- raids against america's early patriots. balloonsvil war, union reconnaissance tracked the size of confederate armies by tracking the number of campfires. in world war ii, codebreakers gave us insight into the japanese warplanes. they intercepted communications, help save the lives of the troops. after the war, the rise of the iron curtain and nuclear weapons only increased the need for sustained intelligence. the coldrly days of war, president truman created the national security agency, or nsa, to give us insight into the soviet lock and provider leaders

with information they needed to confront and avert jus catastrophe. we have benefited from both our constitution and our traditions of limited government. u.s. intelligence agencies were anchored in a system of checks oversightss. with from elected leaders and protections for ordinary citizens. meanwhile, totalitarian states like east germany offered a cautionary tale of what could happen when vast unchecked surveillance turn citizens into informers and persecuted people for what they said in the privacy of their own homes. states provedd not to be immune to the abuse of surveillance. in the 1960's, governments spied on civil rights leaders.

additional laws were established in 1970's to ensure that our intelligence capabilities would not be misused against our citizens. the long twilight struggle against communism, we have been reminded that the very liberties that we thought to preserve could not be sacrificed at the altar of national security. as the fall of the soviet union left america without a competing superpower, emerging threats from terrorist groups and the proliferation of weapons of mass distraction placed new and in some ways more complicated demands to our intelligence agencies. globalization and the internet may be spreads more acute as technology a raised borders and allowed individuals to protect great violence, as well is great good. these new threats raised new policy questions. thee few doubt of legitimacy of spying on hostile

states, our framework of laws was not fully adapted to prevent terrorist attacks by individuals acting on their own. ideological small, driven groups. horror of september 11 brought all these issues to the forefront. across the local spectrum, americans recognized that we had to adapt to a world in which a bomb could be built in the basement and our electrical grid to be shut down by operators and ocean away. wewere shaken by the science -- the signs we have missed. phone calls were made to extremists. they traveled to suspicious places. we demanded that our intelligence community improve it's capabilities. and that law enforcement change practices to focus more on preventing attacks before they

happened and prosecuting prosecuting- than terrorists after an attack. it's hard to overstate the transformation america's intelligence community had to go through after 9/11. suddenly needed to do far more than the traditional mission of monitoring hostile powers and gathering information for policymakers. instead, they were now asked to identify targets, plotters and some of the most remote parts of the world and to anticipate the actions of networks that by their very nature cannot be easily penetrated with spies or informants. it is a testimony to the hard work and dedication of the men and women of our intelligence community that over the past decade we have made enormous strides in filling this mission. today, new capabilities allow

intelligence agencies to track who a terrorist is in contact with and follow the trail of his travel or his money. allow information to be collected and shared more quickly and effectively between federal agents and state and local law enforcement. with foreign intelligence services have expanded an art capacity to repel cyber attacks have been strengthened. taken together, these efforts have prevented multiple attacks and save innocent lives. not just here in the united states, but around the globe. yet, in our rush to respond threats, real set of the risk of government overreach , the possibility that we lose some of our core liberties in pursuit of security also became more pronounced.

we saw an immediate aftermath of 9/11 our government engaged in enhanced interrogation techniques that contradicted our values. as a senator, i was critical of .everal practices all too often, new authorities were instituted without adequate public debate. courts,on by the increased congressional oversight, and adjustments by the previous administration, some of the worst excesses were curbed by the time i took office. a variety of factors have continued to complicate america's efforts to both defend our nation and uphold our civil liberties. first, the same technological advancements that allowed u.s. intelligence agencies to pinpoint and al qaeda felon or

an e-mail between two terrorists also mean that routine medications around the world are within our reach. at a time when more and more of our lives are digital, that prospect is disquieting for all of us. second, the combination of increased digital information and powerful supercomputers offers intelligence agencies the possibility of shifting through massive amounts of bulk data to identify patterns or pursue leads that may fort impending threats. that is a powerful tool. government collection and storage of such bulk data also creates a potential for abuse. third, the legal safeguards that restrict surveillance against u.s. persons without a warrant do not apply to persons overseas.

this is not unique to america. the whole point of intelligence is to obtain information that is not publicly available. america's capabilities are unique. the power of new technology means that there are fewer and fewer technical constraints on what we can do. that places a special obligation on us to ask tough questions about what we should do. finally come intelligence agencies cannot function without makes their work more subject to public debate. biasthere is an inevitable , not only within the intelligence community, but amongst all of us who are responsible for national security to collect more information about the world, not less.

absence of institutional requirements for regular debate, and oversight that is public as well as , thete or classified danger of government overreach becomes more acute. it is particularly true when surveillance technology and a reliance on digital information is evolving much more quickly than our loss. for all these reasons, i maintained a healthy skepticism towards our surveillance programs when i became president. i ordered that they be reviewed by my national security team and our lawyers. in some cases, i ordered changes in how we do business. we increased oversight and auditing come including new structures and that compliance .- aimed at compliance gra

we sought to keep congress dated on these t activities. what i did not do was stop these programs wholesale. not only because i felt that they made us more secure, but also because nothing in that initial review and the thing that i've learned since indicated that our intelligence nudity has sought to violate the law or cavalier about the civil liberties of their citizens. contrary, in the next row nearly difficult job, one in which actions are second-guessed , success is unreported, and failure can be catastrophic, the men and women of the intelligence community, including the nsa, consistently followed protocol to protect the privacy of ordinary people. they're not abusing authorities in order to listen to your

private phone calls or read your e-mails. made and whichre is inevitable in any large and complicated human enterprise, they correct those mistakes. are unable to discuss their work with family or friends. the men and women of the nsa know that if another and 11 or massive cyber attack occurs they will be asked why they failed to connect the dots. -- another 9/11. who work at nsa and other intelligence duties throughout this pressure have the knowledge that they play a central role in the defense of our nation. now, to say that our intelligence may be follow the law and is staffed by patriots is not to suggest that i or

felts in my administration complacent about the potential impacts of these programs. who hold office in america have the responsibility to our constitution. while i was confident in the integrity of those who lead our intelligence community, it was clear to me in observing our intelligence operations on a regular basis that changes in our technological capabilities were raising new questions about the privacy safeguards currently in place. moreover, after an extended review of our use of drones in the fight against terrorist a fresh, i believe examination of our surveillance programs was a necessary next step in our effort to get off the footing we maintained since 9/11. for these reasons, indicated in a speech at the national defense university last may that we need a robust public discussion about

the balance between security and liberty. of course, would i did not know the time was that within weeks of my speech an avalanche of snauthorized disclosure would spark controversy that has continued to this day. f open investigation, i will not dwell on mr. snowden's actions. our nation's defense depends in part on the fidelity of those in trust with our nation secrets. if any individual who objects to government policy can take it into their own hands to publicly disclose classified information than we will not be able to keep our people safe or conduct foreign policy. way inr, the sensational which these disclosures that come out has shed more heat.

revealing information to our adversaries in ways that we may not understand for years to come. the task right now is greater than simply repairing the damage done to our operations or preventing more disclosures from taking place in the future. instead, we have to make some important decisions about how to protect ourselves and sustain our leadership in the world while upholding the civil liberties and privacy protections that our ideals and constitution requires. we need to do so not only because it is right, but because the challenges posed by threats like terrorism and proliferation and cyber attacks are not going away anytime soon. they're going to continue to be a major problem. for our intelligence community to be effective over the long haul, we must maintain the

trust of the american people and people around the world. effort will not be completed overnight. given the pace of technological change, we should not expect this to be the last time america has this debate. i want the american people to know that the work has begun. the last six months, created an outside review group on intelligence and comedic asian technologies to make communications -- technologies to make recommendations. privacytened to four advocates and industry leaders. we considered how to approach intelligence in this era of technological revolution. , before outlining specific changes i've ordered, let me make a few broad observations on

this process. first, everyone who has looked at these problems, including skeptics of existing programs, recognizes that we have real .nemies we cannot prevent terrorist attacks are cyber threats without some capability to penetrate digital communications. whether it is to unravel a plot, to make sure that air traffic control systems are not compromised, or to ensure that they do not empty your bank accounts. re required to have capabilities in this field. unilaterallycannot

disarm our intelligence agencies. there is a reason why blackberries and iphones are not allowed in the white house situation room. intelligencethe services of other countries, syruping some who feigned rise over the snowden disclosures, are constantly to listenr government to our conversations and listen to our e-mails and compromise our systems. we know that. number of countries including somewhat loudly criticized the nsa privately knowledge that the america has responsibilities as the world's only superpower. ony themselves have relied information we obtained to protect their own people. second, just as civil

libertarians acknowledge the need for a bust intelligence capabilities, those with response abilities for national security readily knowledge the potential for abuse as intelligence capabilities advance. the folks at nsa and other intelligence agencies are our neighbors, our friends, and family. they have electronic banking medical records like everybody else. they have kids on facebook and instagram and no more than most of us the vulnerabilities to privacy that exist in a world where transactions are recorded and e-mails and texts are stored and our movements can increasingly be tracked through the gps on our phones. there was a recognition by all who participated in these reviews that the challenges to our privacy do not come from government alone. corporations of all shapes and sizes track what you buy, store

and analyze our data, and use it for commercial purposes. that's what you see those ads pop up on your smart phone. all of us understand that the standards for government surveillance programs must be higher. given the unique power of the state, it is not enough or leaders to say trust us and we will not abuse the data we collect. history has too many examples where the trust has been breached. our system of government is built on the premise that our liberty cannot depend on the good intentions of those in power. it depends on the law to constrain those in power. i make these observations to underscore that the basic values of most americans when it comes to questions of surveillance and privacy converge a lot more than the characterizations that emerged over the last several

months. those who were troubled by her existing programs were not interested in repeating the tragedy of 9/11. those who defend these programs interested in civil liberties. the challenge in getting the details right is not simple. over the course of our review, i have reminded myself, i would not be where i am today if it were not for the courage of people like dr. king were spied upon by their own government. as president, a president who intelligence every morning, i can't help but be reminded that america must be vigilant in the face of threats. fortunately, by focusing on facts and specifics, rather than speculation and hypotheticals, this review process has given me and hopefully the american

people some clear direction for change. today, i can announce a series of concrete and substantial reforms that my administration intends to adopt administratively or will seek to create with congress. first, i have approved a new presidential directive for our signals intelligence communities at home and abroad. this guidance will strengthen executive branch oversight of our intelligence communities. it will ensure that we can taken our alliances come our trade and investment relationships come including the concerns of american companies, and our commitment to privacy and basic liberties. we will review decisions about intelligence priorities and sensitive targets on an annual basis of that our actions are regularly scrutinized by our senior national security team. reform programs

and procedures in place to provide greater transparency to our surveillance activities. we will fortify the safeguards that protect the privacy of u.s. persons. ,ince we began this review including information being released today, we have declassified over 40 opinions and orders of the foreign intelligence surveillance court. including the program targeting foreign individuals overseas and the section 215 -- telephone metadata program. the director of national intelligence and consultation with the attorney general will annually review for the purposes of declassification any future opinions of the court with broad privacy implications. they will report to me and to congress on these efforts.

ensure that the court hears a broader range of privacy i am also calling on congress to authorize the establishment of a panel of advocates from outside government to provide an independent voice in significant cases before foreign intelligence surveillance court. third, we will provide additional perfections for activities conducted under section 702, which allows the government to intercept the communication of foreign targets overseas who have information that is important for national security. specifically i'm asking the ni toney general and d institute reforms that place additional restrictions on government's ability to retain, search, and use in criminal cases, communications between incidentallyzens

collected under section 702. . in investigating threats, the fbi also relies on what is called national security threats come which requires companies to supply limited information without disclosing orders to the subject of the investigation. in which it is important that the subject of ae investigation, such as possible terrorist or spy, is not tipped off. we can and should be more transparent and how government uses this authority. i therefore directed the attorney general to amend how we use national security letters so that this secrecy will not be indefinite. so that it will terminate within a fixed time unless the government demonstrates a real need for further secrecy.

we will also enable communications providers to make public more information than ever before about the orders they have received to provide data to the government. this brings me to the program has is generated -- generated the most controversy bees past months. the bulk election of telephone records under section 215. let me repeat what i said when this story first broke. this program does not involve the content of phone calls or the names of people making calls. record ofrovides a phone numbers and the times and length of calls. queried ifat can be and when we have a reasonable suspicion that a particular number is linked to a terrorist organization.

why is this necessary? the program grew out of the desire to address a gap identified after 9/11. made athe 9/11 hijackers phone call from san diego to a known al qaeda safe house. and it's a solid call -- an sa saulaul not call -- n now not call. we need to see who they may be quicklyct with as as possible. this capability can also prove valuable in a crisis. for example, if a bomb goes off in one of our cities and law-enforcement is racing to determine whether a network is poised to conduct additional attacks, time is of the essence. being able to quickly review phone connections to assess

whether a network exists is critical for that effort. involve thedoes not nsa examining the phone records of ordinary americans. rather it consolidates these therds into a database that government can query if it had to specific reason. recordsidation of phone that the companies already retained for business purposes. group turned up no indication that this database has been intentionally abused. i believe it is important that the capabilities that this program is designed to meet is preserved. that, i believe critics are right to point out that without proper safeguards, this type of program could be

used to yield more information about our private lives. it could open the door to more intrusive bulk collection programs in the future. they're also right to point out that although the bulk collection program was subject to oversight by the foreign surveillance court an has been reauthorized by congress, has never been subject to vigorous public debate. for all these reasons, i believe we need a new approach. i am therefore ordering a thesition that will and section 215 bulk metadata program as exists and establishes a program without the government only missable metadata. it this will not be simple. group recommended

that our current approach be replaced by one in which the providers or a third-party with thee bulk records government accessing information is needed. both of these options pose difficult problems. relying solely on the records of couldle ri providers force companies to alter their policies. thesingle company holding database could carry out what is essentially a government , moreon with more expense legal ambiguity, potentially less accountability, all of which would have an impact on increasing public confidence that their privacy is being protected. during the review process, some suggested that we may also be able to preserve the capabilities we need through recombination of existing authorities, better information

sharing, and recent technological advancements. more work needs to be done to determine how the system will work. because of the challenges involved, i ordered that the transition away from the existing program will two steps.o we will only pursue phone calls two steps away from terrorist phone number. the database can be queried only or ina judicial finding the case of a true emergencies. next, step two, i've instructed the intelligence community and the attorney general to use this transition.

period to develop a new approach without the government holding .his metadata itself ear and they will report back to me with options for alternative approaches before the program comes up for reauthorization on march 28. during this. time, we will discuss the reauthorization of the program is needed. -- as needed. the reforms should give people greater confidence that their rights are being protected, use even as law enforcement retains the tools they need to keep us safe. additional issues require further debate. some who participated in our view, as some members of congress would like to see more

sweeping reforms. we have to go to a judge each time before these requests. here i have concerns that we should not set a standard for thatrism investigations are higher than those involved in investigating and ordinary crime. i agree that greater oversight on the use of these letters may be appropriate and i prefer to work with congress on this issue. there are those who would like to see different changes to the court then i proposed. i'm working with congress to ensure that we build a broad consensus for how to move forward and i'm confident that we can shape an approach that meets our security needs while upholding the civil liberties of every american. let me now turn to the separate

set of concerns that have been raised overseas. i will focus on america's approach to intelligence collection abroad. as i've indicated, the united states has unique response abilities when it comes to intelligence collection. they helped not only our nation, but our friends and our allies as well. only berts will effective if ordinary citizens in other countries have confidence that the united states respects their privacy, two. the leaders of our chris friends and allies deserve to know that i want to know what they think about an issue. i will pick up the phone and call them rather than turn to the surveillance. just as we balance security and privacy at home, our global leadership demands that we balance our security requirements against our need to maintain the trust and cooperation among people and leaders around the world.

reason, the new presidential directive that i've issued today will clearly prescribe what we do and do not do when it comes to our overseas surveillance. , the directive makes clear that the united states only uses signals intelligence for legitimate national security purposes and not for the purposes of indiscriminately reviewing the e-mails and phone calls of ordinary folks. i've also made it clear that the united states does not collect intelligence to suppress criticism or dissent, nor do we this advance people on the basis of ethnicity or race or gender or sexual orientation or religious elites. we do not provide advantages to u.s. companies or commercial sectors. in terms of our bulk collection of signal intelligence, u.s.

intelligence agencies will only use such data to meet specific .ecurity requirements counterintelligence, counterterrorism, counter ,roliferation, cyber security force protection for our troops and combating, transnational crime, including sanctions in asia. in this directive, i have taken the unprecedented step of expanding certain protections that we have for the american people to people overseas. i have directed the dni and to develop the safeguards come which will limit the duration that we can hold personal information while also restricting the use of this information. the bottom line is that people around the world, regardless of their nationality, should know that the united states does not spy on ordinary people who don't

threaten our national security. we take their privacy concerns into account in our policies and procedures. this applies to foreign leaders as well. given the understandable attention of this issue, i've made clear to the intelligence community that unless there is a compelling national security purpose, we will not monitor the communications of heads of state and government of our close friends and allies. i've instructed my national security team come as well as the intelligence community, to work with foreign counterparts to deepen our coronation and cooperation in ways that we build trust going forward. clear -- our intelligence agencies will continue to gather information about the intentions of governments. in the same way that the intelligence services of every other nation does.

we will not apologize to believe because our services may be more effective. heads of state and government whom we work closely should feel confident that we are treating them as real partners. the changes i've ordered do just that. finally, to make sure that we follow through on all these reforms, i am making some important changes to how our government is organized. the state department will .esignate an officer we will appoint a senior official at the white house to implement the new privacy safeguards that i've announced today. resources to the centralize and improve the process we used to handle foreign requests for legal

assistance, keeping our high standards of privacy while helping foreign partners fight crime and terrorism. counsel to asked my lead a conference of review of big data and privacy. this group will consist of government officials who, along with the president's council of andsors on science technology, will reach out to privacy experts, technologists, and business leaders and look at how these challenges are being confronted i both the public and private sectors. whether we can forge international norms on how to manage this data and how we can continue to promote the free flow of information in ways that are consistent with both ryba see and security. for ultimately, what is at stake a this debate goes far beyond

few months of headlines or passing foreign policy. when the country hears a noise, what is really at stake is how we remain true to who we are in a world that is remaking itself at dizzying speeds. whether it is the ability of individuals to communicate , ors, to access information to forge bonds with people on the other side of the globe, technology is remaking what is possible for individuals and for institutions and for the international order. so while the reforms i've announced will point us in a new direction, i am mindful that more work will be needed in the future. -- thisg i'm certain of debate will make a stronger.

also know that in this time of change, the united states of america will have two lead. .- to lead it may see some times that america is being held to different standards. i will admit, the readiness of some to assume the worst motives of our government can be frustrating. to have itcts china opened the made about their surveillance programs. or russia to take privacy concerns of citizens in other places into account. remember, we are held to a difference entered precisely because we have been at the forefront of defending personal privacy and human dignity. as the nation that developed the internet, the world expects us to ensure that the digital revolution works as a tool for individual empowerment, not

government control. having faced down the dangers of fascism and communism, the world expects us to stand up to the principal -- for the principle that every person has the right to think and form becauseships freely individual freedom is the wellspring of human progress. those valleys make us who we are. -- those values make us who we are. we should not shy away from high expectations. for more than two centuries, our constitution has weathered every type of change because we have been willing to defend it. been willinge have to question the actions that have been taken in its defense. today is no different.

i believe we can meet high expectations. together, let's chart a way preserve the liberties that make our nation worth fighting for. thank you. god bless you. and may god bless the united states of america. thank you. [applause] >> president obama from earlier today. senatorront row, we saw the vermonth -- democrat. i amaid, "i'v encouraged that the president has embraced the growing consensus that the section 215 phone records program should not continue in its current form."

will get your phone calls in just a minute. let's get the phone numbers up for you. , the line ismocrat -- we will have live reaction from the former british defense analyst. -- line for republicans is ts --ine for independenc those are numbers if you want to get in on the chat. you can tweak us. cspanchat. you can go on our facebook and let us know what you think. an writes in to say that

these things were put in place by george osha's senior. senior. nathaniel tweets, obama is basically saying if you don't support me spying on you, another terrorist attack will happen. we'll will get one more tweak here from jack, who says that barack obama has to rely on security issues through speaker boehner's congress, then don't inspect anything accomplished. lots of ways for you to get a hold of us. in southrt out portland, indiana. you were on c-span. i am encouraged by president obama statements today. however, it occurs to me -- wouldn't it be a beautiful world if they were to collect no metadata? this would be extended to private companies. why is it that we except any

metadata collective from our computers? has anybody asked that question? let's go onto apple creek, ohio. caller: yes, i watched the speech. encouraged by anch the speaking ability of our president. i'm so proud of the elected people where the foresight to put this man in office -- one in and actually lead mannertandable with remedies that will make this country stronger and safer. host: we appreciate your call. coming at the top of the hour, we will be live at the panel discussion on the resident speech.

-- the president's speech. independents. caller: if we don't want another 9/11, we did whatever it takes in order to ensure that any information needed -- to make sure there is another -- not another 9/11 is important. 99% of the people today either tweets, text, or whatever they do. it is worthless, other than those responding to something dangerous in the country. the big debate over this is a real problem in making sure that

those things don't happen again. ohost: we will move on to chattanooga. caller: i want to address the fact that the president did not bring up the fact that people have no control, whether it is a cia agent or anybody from europe --from a different country if you end up getting on one of these lists for no fault of your -- i have had to switch my number because i felt like, who are these people calling me? it seems like they did not even know who i was and they did not want to know my name. they would not give me their name. they kept on talking and trying

to establish a relationship. host: thanks for your call. we want to remind you come you can make yourself heard on facebook. james on facebook says, the only people secrets can't be shared with the public. we want to welcome our radio listeners. the numbers are on the screen. princeton, north carolina. what do you think about the s speech?' caller: i liked what obama was saying. his job to keep up what is doing. he is doing a good. that's what i need.

that's what i wanted to say about obama. he is doing real good in keeping us safe and keeping going where as the president of the united states. that's what i wanted to say. host: mike from cleveland. my name is mike. i was watching this program today and i noticed that the a couple wants to pick people to monitor this surveillance program. they are all, government people. why doesn't he have out of , one senator being a republican and one senator being a democrat, and put them in charge of monitoring these surveillance programs? this would keep the government out of it -- what i'm trying to

a democrat and a republican or an independent, one from each side monitoring the situation. host: this tweet -- i think obama did a good job laying out the history of intelligence operations. coming up, if you did not see the president's beach, 8:00 tonight you will have again. president's speech, 8:00 tonight we will have it again. caller: i want to thank president obama. he does a good job of explaining things that are going on in our country. i can remember when our country did not know anything about a lot of things that were going on in our government.

when they were trying to do andgs, going to the moon, we did not know everything. we do not have to because our government was trying to push our nation forward. now that i see we are going forward, i really appreciate president obama trying to help us so that we won't be afraid of all the things that are going on. thank you. host: we will go to boulder, colorado. our line for republicans. i am 50/50., i'm a big fan of 1984. -- people say we will not get that far. it is a slippery slope. look at the past. before we had the dirty minds of our politicians, and that we can just look at our google searches

-- and now they can just look at google searches. turn thisgoing to violation into a different fourth amendment violation and spend millions of your dollars to do it. let's go to nashville, tennessee. our line for independents. we will move along to illinois. it looks like mickey. caller: i have a question. i realized that as far as surveillance,, government programs, i have a question likeed to other incidents exploitation of children, photos safetyalize it is for related to surveillance, but i

was just concerned about that, too. or if there is another way to find out about these things such as photos or that kind of thing. host: cara in pennsylvania. welcome to c-span. hello? we will try -- let's try this. caller: i am here. thank you for having me. 25-year-old -- i don't know everything about politics, but i have been taking the time to really take time out and in how we playry a role in the entire world. -- people my age weren't taught this.

america as a nation was founded on biblical principles. our founding fathers followed the bible. it is a product of the new testament. i respect barack obama for the way that he speaks. he is a very good speaker, and intelligent man, and i believe he thinks what he is doing is right. in i see that we are living an abomination of desolation right now. becoming ais desolation -- this is how i see it. host: is that related to the nsa ?ctivities tha your reaction to that -- the nsa's various activities. securityith national

and how they're going on about surveillance, there has to be -- i believe in protection and i've believe that the leaders of america where following the -- who areiples following the right principles from the bible should take over our country. -- if anybodywhen is in [captions copyright national cable satellite corp 2014]