usher in an era of harsh treatment and could lead to oppression of gays and lesbians. >> the administration will conduct an internal review of our relationship with uganda. we will be sure that all dimensions of our engagement uphold our antidiscrimination policies and principles. caller: i am a vietnam veteran. is, people complain about this. that is baloney.

this is not blaming the military. i support some cuts or getting some people. they give the military a chance to better themselves through education and new ideas. they will keep you in if you understand. politicians, why do they change the rules and keep our money here and support our country? people want you to protect our family. . of greathere are lots calls. you guys are such a treasure to the united states. i think we can all agree that

our military should not be used unnecessarily. we have soldiers in our va hospital's and you can talk to them and they don't have arms or legs. i don't think there should be any cats for the people -- cuts who have any people who served. 22 sites today. -- 22 a suicides a day for soldiers who have served. we should not cut tax -- back on services. i would encourage viewers to call their reps. they will be lobbying for the end of the week for more sanctions and military

aggression toward iran. call your reps and say we don't want another war based on unsubstantiated claims. these call your reps. caller: good morning. the commentaryo about eisenhower and his warning. people don't remember this. 9/11, we hade defense secretary rumsfeld get up in front of the american people on television and tell them that the military-industrial complex had $2.6 trillion. they don't know where the money went. this is fraud and corruption and waste. it should stop. they don't have an accounting system.

host: this is the last call we will take on the subject. we will go to eric holder live in just a few minutes. the room is slowly starting to fill up for the event very you can catch this event live on c-span. thank you for holding on. [captioning performed by national captioning institute]

the attorneys general are waiting to hear from attorney general or colder. it should get underway shortly. the new york times is reporting that the attorney general yesterday injected the administration into the emotional and politicized debate over the future of state same-sex marriage bans. he said state attorneys general defend lawsgated to they feel are discriminatory. them toot encourage disavow their own laws. he said if they have studied bans on gay marriage could refuse to defend them. the reporting is in the new york

times. the attorney general will be out shortly. will be meeting with speaker john boehner. the leadersow what will discuss. the president and speaker of the house will meet sometime today. the senate has gavel then. they will take up some judicial nominations and votes on those expected today. the house is in just a little bit later, noon for morning hours speeches. they will take up a couple of bills today dealing with the irs and notification of taxpayers. there will be a lot of coverage of the house. we want to share a conversation from the washington journal. this is about overhauling the

tax code. we will show you that conversation in just a bit. we hear the attorney general will be out shortly. we will stay here live on c-span.

>> thank you for your patience. they are about to arrive. >> our next guest is a special

guest. i amend general holder for his willingness to attend this meeting and to speak to us candidly and openly every year. our parting gift for general holder when he is here today is going to be a baseball cap, i think speaks to how many times you have been here. all the gifts we give out have already been given to you. [laughter] we will give you something that you might actually be able to use. we are from there with general holder. he was sworn in as the 82nd attorney general of the united of 2009. february in 1997, he was named by president clinton to be the deputy attorney general. he served as u.s. attorney for the district of columbia. in 1988, he was nominated by

president reagan to become the associate judge of the superior court of the district of columbia. mr. holder was a litigation partner in washington. it is indeed a privilege to have you here to address us, general. [applause] >> good morning. hello? good morning and thank you for those kind words. we are going high tech this year. you for yournk dedicated service over a good number of years. we are wondering what is next. thank you for your great leadership for this organization. it is a privilege to take part

in this important meeting. toective thank -- i like thank the leadership team for bringing us together this weekend for inviting me to speak to this interest -- distinguished group. i've been privileged to work closely with many of the attorney general's in this room. we have collaborated on cutting-edge public safety and financial crime initiatives. we are strengthening our courts and corrections systems and finding innovative ways to reduce costs and share resources. we find ourselves on opposite sides of an issue. that wethe differences have encountered from time to time, we all share the same set of goals. we are striving to fulfill the same responsibilities by protecting the safety of our citizens and the security of our nation, by safeguarding civil rights that everyone is entitled to, by fighting crime and financial fraud.

we improve the effectiveness of our terminal justice system. we strengthen collaboration from government and law enforcement partners at every level. a century, the national association of attorneys general have brought leading legal minds together to advance this work. in recent years, through sequestration and government shutdown and budgetary difficulties, he of shown remarkable leadership in addressing these are your tees it we all share. i have made it a part -- priority to participate in this program. as a prosecutor and a judge and an attorney, i have seen the profound and positive difference is that state leaders like you can make. i understand the unique roles that you play as the chief law-enforcement officers in your

jurisdictions. you and your colleagues are high and nearing rod-based efforts to recalibrate and reform the criminal justice system to ensure that 21st century challenges can be met with 21st century solutions. you're responding to the same situation that we look at for the federal level. ofwant to break the cycle criminality and poverty the traps individuals. this commitment has in many places given way to principal enlarged state and federal partnership. states and led7 by state officials from both parties have directed significant funding away from prison construction and toward evidence-based programs and services like supervision and drug treatment.

these reduce recidivism. in a report funded by the bureau of justice projects 17 states will save $4.6 billion over a 10 year. of time. remains to bet seen. these efforts are bearing fruit. they are enjoying promise across the country. , north carolina, texas, ohio and kentucky, arkansas, pennsylvania, hawaii, and far beyond, we have real reform and improve public safety and save precious resources. the changes that have led to these results should be terribly -- carefully studied. i announced a new smart on crime

initiative that allows the justice department to improve on innovations that states of lead. we become smarter and more efficient in battling crime. develop commonsense reforms to the federal criminal justice system. under this initiative, we are ensuring that minimum sentences for certain drug-related crimes will now be reserved for the most serious criminals. to createing steps turner'srograms as in -- alternatives to incarceration. we continue to rely on your leadership and close engagement data-drivenucing results. ourant to make right on commitment to giving people

opportunities once their time in the criminal justice system is over. we have done important work in this regard. we have catalogued statutes that put unwise collateral consequences to housing, employment, and voting. individuals with past convictions from fully integrated into society. i asked state attorney general to undertake things in their own jurisdictions and mitigate unnecessary collateral consequences without decreasing a look safety. acrossthe same request the federal government as well. i've directed everyone in the justice department to lead by example on this issue by considering whether any proposed rule or regulation may present

unnecessary barriers to successful reentry. ago, i call upon state leaders and other elected officials to take these efforts tother by passing reforms restore voting rights to those who have served their terms in prison or jail and completed their parole or probation and paid their fines. so many consequences, we see that the disenfranchisement of those who have paid their debts to society served no public safety purpose. it is painted of in nature. it is counterproductive to improve reentry into society. the free affirm that exercise of our most photo rights should not be subject to geography or the lingering effects of fraud and unjust policy. forplaud rand paul

addressing this issue. i encourage each of you to consider this fight in your home state. andcognize that this reform changes we seek will not be easy to achieve. none of them will take cold overnight. i know that as law-enforcement leaders, your work has never been more complex or challenging. and this time of budgetary uncertainty when unwise cuts have impacted federal and state and local programs that we depend on. you need all the support. you need all the resources you can get. i won't stop fighting to provide tools and assistance that local law-enforcement needs. the bipartisan funding agreement signed intoently law will restore funding for a number of key law-enforcement priorities by returning the justice department appropriations to

re-sequestration levels. this legislation has enabled us to lift a hiring freeze and then in place for over three years. we can bring on additional agents and prosecutors and other staff to bolster ongoing investigative and enforcement efforts across america. willticipate that this allow us to further invest in the kinds of place-based strategies you have proven effective. localitiesstates and crime challenges and we can build on the outstanding work that attorneys and others have made possible. this is despite great adversity. this is the essential duty we have been sworn. not just to win cases, but to

see that justice is done. this is the cause it brings us together in washington this week. the threatsonfront and seize opportunities that are before us. this is the task the american people have entrusted the leaders in this room. we don't use our legal system to punish those who have done wrong , we answer the kind of fundamental questions about fairness and equality that will determine who we are and who we aspire to be as a nation and as a people. these questions drove president obama and me to decide that justice department attorneys section threend of the defense of marriage act. this decision was not taken lightly. our actions are motivated by the strong believe that all measures

that distinguish among people with their sexual orientation must have a heightened level of scrutiny. this was unconstitutional discrimination. the supreme court upheld our decision. down the federal government not recognizing gay and lesbian couples. this is a victory for equal treatment and equal protection under the law. in response to that decision, state attorneys general in nevada, jim -- pennsylvania have reached determinations in their states. decisions at any level not to defend individual laws must be exceedingly rare. they must be reserved only for exceptional -- truly exceptional -- circumstances. they should not come from

allison or little disagreement. they should hinge on firm constitutional grounds. i believe we must be suspicious things based solely on sexual orientation. thatst uphold the values all are created equal and entitled to equal opportunity. this bedrock principle is immutable. it is timeless. it is the heart of what this country has always stood for. it evolvesanding of over time. after the administration decided ideals were not put into action or given the full force of law in a single incident. our ideals are continually advanced as our justice system

and our union are strengthened. we expand the circle of those who are entitled to detection in the -- protections in the constitution. realized inideals the form of supreme court a clear path forward. they compel us to extraordinary action. the progress we have seen has been consistent. the central tenants of our constitution and the federal truth that president obama one said that one all-americans are treated as equal, we are all more free. when we come together this week to steel our resolve and to pledge our fidelity to the

principles that guide us and the constitution, we must strive to move our country forward. we must keep fighting against violence and safeguard civil rights. we must bring the justice system in line. accept the status quo the fall short of the constitution. we must keep standing up and speaking out no matter what the challenges we face to eradicate victimization and injustice. this will not always be easy. our tactical path will diverge. as we are dedicated to a common cause and determined to disagree with mutual respect and devote to our pursuit, our collective efforts and leadership will take us there. the grist debate need not be partisanship.

we are called to serve. we are expected to lead. i want to thank you for your work and your partnership and the opportunity to take part in this dialogue. i look forward to all we will do and all we will achieve in the critical days ahead. thank you for a much. -- thank you very much. [applause] >> if everybody could stay in their positions come a we are going to pause to allow the media to get their things together and pack up.

[no audio]

[inaudible]

[inaudible]

>> if you missed attorney general holders comments, you can see them on our website at org.an. the president will meet with john weiner. the up seceded press says it will be their first meeting alone since december 2012. during the deficit reduction talks. they are by phone and met as part of a low g -- large group. they plan to discuss a plan -- wide range of topics. president obama and issue the eating. announced cuts to the size of the military.

you can post your thoughts on facebook. later today, house and senate better it -- veteran committees will listen to disabled veterans. that is scheduled to start at 2:00 p.m. eastern. >> we are told as students and as a nation that there are all kinds of citizens and marches and demonstrations that occur. they are done by these famous iconic people. rosa parks was so tired that she refused to get up from the bus and sparked the bus boycott. -- the preacher

president referred to him as a young preacher from georgia -- king, hemartin luther could do this stuff. all of these things, they sounded good. they simplify a much more complicated history. manyhistory involves so african-americans who proactively dismantled racial subjugation, including rosa parks. she was an activist. she didn't just refused to give up her seat. it was a concerted effort to transform democratic institution. of dark days, latest wills, his be in bookstores on march 4.

sunday he will take your questions, live for three hours on book tv on c-span two. inside u.s.k intelligence efforts. spoke at the world affairs councils of connecticut. of cyber security and the place in the ukraine. this is about an hour and 15 minutes. of what you dost of accomplishments. i have to recite this. i will do it fast. that is not how i want to introduce arthur. he is a white house fellow. he worked with national security council. kissinger.ith henry

he had three major positions in the senate, including being the administrative assistant to the staff. stents was with robert byrd who was of the great characters of american politics. few companies he did not touch. he had such power that he moved 10 echoes headquarters from texas to greenwich. that is quite amazing. he was assistant dean at

fletcher school of law and politics. he was director of communications for the number in intelligence and the united states of america. , he was they communications director for the national geo spatial intelligence agency. thatmanage 16 satellites control our navigation systems in the united states. they have 16,000 employees to do that. i think they're doing something else. [laughter] of theis the chairman public utilities regulatory authority. that is not how i want to

introduce him. arthur has a lot of skills this serious and important and intelligent view of the world. imitations.rvelous i am going to ask him to do one. knowledgeincredible of languages. i was doing a talk to three or 400 people from africa. arthur helped me on the talk. timer had spent a lot of in the congo. meerwards, they came up to and said you got it right. said where he was from. summitd start speaking

native tongue. then for somebody from togo would come and he would speak the native tongue. he left about 10 africans completely in a blither. how does this white guy from connecticut know our languages question mark [applause] >> thank you, peter. of all the introductions i have received in life, yours was the most recent. [laughter] i understand that you are now the chairman emeritus of world affairs council. we all remember from our latin that comes from two latin words

meaning out of and deserves to be [applause] . thank you. forgo doingore -- impressions. i want to thank the world affairs council for having me here. to henry kissinger at an event in washington and he recalled that. he said that was a great event. i have kept that video that you made of me. it has so many of my friends on it. i occasionally play on it for visitors who come to the house. here members very fondly his time here. clearance, iurity was a youngster and in the white house. it was decided that i would write some correspondence and intelligence packages it went

from kissinger to the president. i was the last check. have security clearances. some of which were classified. , thisllow who cleared me s, saidthe cold war days thoma watch after yourself and don't do anything stupid. they know that you are here and what your job is. there is a good chance somebody will try to compromise you and don't do anything dumb. i said can you give me some guidance? , i have had a long career in counterterrorism.

i've given this briefing 100 times. to give it to somebody as ugly as you. if ever there was a woman who was interested in you, you know damn well you're being compromised. i've been waiting three decades for some alluring woman to be interested in what i do in intelligence. [applause] [laughter] needad no idea the deep that this is fulfilled. there are a lot of friends here today. some of you go back to when i was a toddler. some i worked with at the white house. i thank you all for coming.

in addition to our distinguished peter kelly, he is that many careers. his had a career in international relations. we do have our attorney general and i think you for coming. not everybody knows that there are three siblings. as talented as our attorney most talentede and attractive is his sister. in the intelligence business, you have to keep secrets. you learn and you promise to never divulge. that can be stressful and lonely. it works better if your partner understands and supports you and knows not to ask questions. thank you.

i appreciate that. a few points i will make about the intelligence community and threats and challenges it presents. i would like to talk about the way forward and take questions. itsecticut has produced fair share of heroes in the intelligence world. i was often invited to the cia to speak to groups and give orientations. there is an auditorium and there stands the statue of nathan hale. that, ita speech like is kind of moving. on the statue are his famous words, i regret that i have only one life to give for my country. it means a lot to people from the intelligence community. some of them do give their lives.

some of their names the you and i will never know have done that. he is an inspiration. he went to new york city and was discovered because he was disguised and eight -- as a peddler. that aroused suspicion. they found out that he was not what he was disguised to be. they found he was a spy and they hanged him. there is another hero of connecticut and that was my predecessor. john is 83 years old. received thehe cia's highest award for valor. this is the distinguished intelligence cross. john flew into china.

their mission was to pick up an agent who was of special importance to the united states. the agent had been compromised by the chinese. as their plane came in in a secret location, it was shot down. the pilots were killed. john spent 20 years in a chinese prison. he remained there until the early 1970's. have yelled graduates who went in after world war ii and played crucial roles in early leadership in the cia. oes weeople are hereo never hear about. serve quietly. that is what intelligence work

is often all about. most people in intelligence are just less well-known. less dangerous lives. they do things like economic analysis or photo interpretation or the intercept conversations. backbone.he they ought to be recognized in the same way that we recognize our military and police officers and first responders. they are public servants. the work they do should be celebrated. we can't know what they do, but the fact that they are there and doing their job is what we should be celebrating. one lesson i learned early on in intelligence was i learned and israeli intelligence officer. his lesson was that in life the strategic focus is the long-term spectrum.

in 1978, i was chief of staff. the critical issue was the sale of f-15s to saudi arabia. there was a very real interest in that. we refused to meet with any of the vendors for those planes. senator rubik off and i went to saudi arabia and met with leadership. the problem was their 1950's airplanes were falling apart. new ones.d the air force said the need to have f-15s. the u.s. wanted to train the saudi pilots. around and said this country is in danger and the

vital flow of oil is something we need to defend the. we will proceed. the president said i need you because israel decided they did not want it to happen. the f-15 was a symbol of --rmous pressed each enormous prestige. israel did not like the idea that this other country might get them to. --re was a fight in the sun senate. this is the only fight they ever lost. it was approved by a margin of nine votes. it was an excruciating experience. it prevailed. happened.rama, it a 1990's there was replacement fleet put in. after the vote, there was a lot

of hard feelings. this israeli intelligence is or was working the mse. we had lunch. i accepted. looked at mey intensely across the table and said, you be this. that is not how we look at it. -- were doingare what was right for the netted states. differently.this he said, here is working together tomorrow. positive relationship going forward. that is what i mean by strategic focus and long-term perspective. we did. difficulty,s of strategic focus and a long-term perspective are vital.

it is a large and complex array of 16 intelligence agencies. there is the office of the director of the director of national intelligence. them are in the defense department. the news a been in lot. agencyional geospatial take pictures from satellites. the defense intelligence agency does intelligence matters. the national reconnaissance office launches and manages satellites. a lot of people think that you launch a satellite and is just up there. you fly a satellite. or you determine where it is going to be at any one time and you maintain it. the nro does a very valuable role.

to focus on the netted states. the fbi and the department of homeland security are concerned with threats and terrorist organizations that could threaten the united states. the work with local and state governments. the treasury department is concerned with financial intelligence. the drug enforcement agency works with the obviousness of their title. we also have each of the five armed forces with their own intelligence branch. if you added up, it is 16 of them. the problem are the silos. we learned from 9/11 that all that intelligence was there. some existed here and there. it was ever brought together. retrospectively, we looked back and saw that all the clues and pieces were there but they had

never been put into a coherent hole. we needed integrated intelligence. my friend was a commander of submarine. he was given an order to go photograph a brand-new ship from a hostile country. water atnto shallow great peril to himself. he took great risks and took photographs and was able to escape. when you think you have a hundred people's lives in your hand and you are taking that risk, he did his duty. he transferred to the national security council. he was working on things when this question came up. they looked at the files with the photographs of this ship.

they were satellite photos. i risk the lives of my crew to go up there and take these from a submarine when you guys had them from satellite? that is what silos are. that is what a lack of integration does. navy intelligence did not know the satellite agency had the pictures taken. that is a we are fighting today. we want integrated intelligence. i can give several other examples. that was for a poignant to me. that met the life of a friend was wrist -- risk. after september 11. it was created to do four things. one was an able wise holocene. the second was to support action. the third was to have capability and balance. for is to be an integrated team.

it has been a partial success. at the heart of all this is the unique advantage of american intelligence over other countries. classican outstanding spy network called in human -- called human intelligence. people are spying on other people. we are outstanding in our capabilities. so are other countries that don't have a google advantages. whom of countries for butlligence is a huge thing don't have satellites. think of cuba or israel or singapore. they have extremely skilled spy networks. what distinguishes the united states is we have very capable human intelligence. we have technical capacity that is not equaled anywhere else in

the world. we get to hear things and see things in integrate things that other countries just cannot do. present arks, we multi dimensional package. the standard of success is often not this broad array. act.rospect of a terrorist is a rallyst attack of public opinion. intelligence community a grade. that is not fair. no one said the world is fair. it is easy for a calamity to take place. 50 million legal visitors come to the united states every year.

we have more than 14,000 homicides in the united states every year. 30 thousand deaths every year. attack. a terrorist we had boston, that was not a foreign attack. if you look at the threats facing the united states, we don't have many terrorist attacks. the intelligence committee does its job very well. it is not infallible. there will be attempts and there are attempts all the time. we have to recognize that. our strength in doing this lies in integration and the remarkable capabilities that we have. to reform the community comes from changing the culture. question. change the the old-style was if you were

obliged to share something. who can i share this with. is there somebody who needs this information? it is making great progress. some rivalries remain. the white house is sometimes reluctant to delegate real power. some agencies like the cia are and jealous of their role reject reporting lines other than erect -- direct to the president. the intelligence community is an infant by washington standards. networks. theyed all have the same badge. my intelligence badge could get me into any one of those 16 agencies.

we used to have 16 different badges. now you show up and you can get in. common policies and shared cultures and things that never existed before 9/11. that is a huge advance. a major source of strength is our cooperation with allies. a unique institution is one that i's.answer the five e to say that we work together is a massive understatement. intelligenceed in in ways that profoundly affect their approach to national security. they agreed not to spy on each other. policy veryte basically. this alignment exceeds popular

understanding. that and thenl till you do not understand how closely they are linked. i was once at a download station, which is a facility from which information from satellites comes down to earth. available, digested, sent on to people who need to receive it. i was there at a shift change, and about 15 people, mostly military, came on, and i noticed the new guy lining everybody up, not american, he was an aussie, a major in the australian air force. i watched him operate. he lined them up. clearly in charge. i asked somebody, what does that

mean, this fellow? he is our boss. he assesses and gives the annual fitness report for the americans working there. that is not cooperation. fullis integration, integration, and it happens elsewhere as well. i say that point because what came out of that download station went to all five countries and did not come from americans or the kiwis. it came from all of them. relationship is absolutely critical. just from the five i's, about everyone else in the world has some degree of policy, convergent indifference with us. we need allies. but it is a tricky business, because aside from those five i's we corroborate in some areas

-- we cooperate in some areas and some areas we do not. barely the united states and russia collect against each other, but right now they are collaborating on keeping errors and damage out of the olympic games. are they friends? no. -- are theyies enemies? no. strong resistance to breaking down barriers with allies. it has been widely reported that the director of national intelligence sought to strengthen our intelligence sharing with friends, and bob gates in his book has written about this. that effort was defeated in the united states, not ready for expansion beyond the five i's to include other countries. -- manage imagine relationships with your allies?

everything you do counts. we suffered a major strain, tensions to the enhanced interrogation techniques and quantum up. that was controversial, and it had a negative effect. in whateed to believe you are doing, and when you have a dissenting factor involved, it affects attitudes, work him and what happens, so many people inside and outside intelligence were morally offended by what was going on and it became a campaign issue in 2008. people debate whether these techniques were torture or not, and if what happened ever happened to you or a member of the family, you would never have that debate. and fortunately, both obama dennis blair immediately said it is over, we are not going to get into what it was and how you define it. it will not happen on our watch, and it ended, which made a huge

change with our relationship with our allies. it also did damage to our intelligence community. people who were told you this, it is legal, it is moral, it is absolutely necessary for our intelligence proceeded to do so and then were second-guessed later on by people who said it was not legal and it was not moral and we do not believe it was necessary. how does a professional reactor that in order to maintain your morale? strategic focus and long-term perspective. we need that in the intelligence business, and when we do not follow it we sometimes pay the price. at the switch to a more pleasant topic, the attraction of young people. it is amazing what the effect they are having. the intelligence community always ranks the national surveys as one of the best places for the united states government to go to work. people like it there. it is a positive attraction. when they get there they have great jobs.

sometimes you get up to 5000 applican per month trying to get into the intelligence community. the acceptance rate is maybe 10%. very difficult to get a job in the intelligence community, and very prestigious when you do. they hire interesting people, information specialists, linguists, military able, mathematicians, video gamers. strategists, the united states has a huge advantage internationally because of that diverse city of our population. we have a remarkably talented core of our young people in our ranks. espionage is popular these days. jobs.njoyed their that electronic generation that lives on social media makes it much easier to break down these silos.

on, they people coming cannot imagine why you keep things here and not share them there. their instinct is to share information, not keep it within the solid confines of the traditional bureaucracy, and you see the difference between -- people as always i am, working in there, whatinformation, not n the solid confines of the their perspectives are and the youngsters'. it done far faster than my generation could, and how do they share it? healthy. parochialism is breaking down. nothing else makes sense to people like that. what about threats and challenges? especially in times of economic we do not recessions, think of ourselves as we are and as the rest of the world does think of us as basically living in luxury. our standard of living, what we are able to enjoy here puts us ofa level of a high standard

living and vulnerability that most countries just do not have. 9/11 brought home to us what a lot of countries live with all the time, that vulnerability, the threat from terrorists, and continues to exist today with cyber attacks. in my current position, leading connecticut's public utilities control authority, i am aware of the threat of cyber. they are dangerous and ubiquitous. there are a lot of evil people out there trying to do some nasty things that affects all of us. we have to have countermeasures to be able to do that. unfortunately, and you have a liberal open society such as we have, and we want to stay that way we do not want to turn into east germany. we can be secure, if you just had absolute, rigorous controls everywhere, but that is not the united states. live the kind of lives we want to live, we have to accept there is this vulnerability and we have to do counter it.

include listening to and using the resources of our professionals in the field. what i only discussed his defense, and is vital, but at the same time there is a remarkable positive use of national intelligence. especially the national intelligence council, a group of 100, 140 academics, intelligence veterans, very smart but talented people led by a person who is extremely smart and helen did, and what they do is they analyze. they start with the background of professors, and what they have, and they add to it, and the product they come -- that comes from them is remarkable. this is one of the greatest assets the united states has. and they can integrate from what they learn from intelligence,

although 16 agencies, they are available to enable wise decisions. foreseeunity did not that the client of the soviet union, did not get the weapons of mass destruction of saddam hussein, but the overall record has been extremely impressive and it is a talent resource we do not use enough. one of the basic restrictions in hodgins -- inherent in intelligence work is the inadequacy of intelligence. i worked with the director of national intelligence, mr. clapper, a veteran of the intelligence we world. he once turned to me and said reflecting on experience he said, 50 years of experience in the world of intelligence, there are two outcomes in national security affairs. an operational success. the other is an intelligence failure. they are used to being blamed

for things going wrong. when they do not go wrong it is because of intelligence. usedo not often intelligence the way you should. one goes back to an example of like to use, not using your intelligence, go back to the strategic arms limitation treaty. again, to work with senator robocop, they finished the treaty, they had a group of 12 senators to meet the senators to complete the ratification. he was the chairman, i was chief of staff, and before we left one of the u.s. intelligence agencies came around and met with the senator and said, you are about to meet somebody we do not know anybody -- anything about. a candidate member of the politburo. we said we know very little about this guy, and if you would spend some time with him and tell us what your impressions are, we would appreciate it. of course i did.

after a major anklet -- banquet, i pulled the senator aside and important, you just have to go back and ratified it. the us is not something you leave to chance. said i am inoff favor of ratifying the treaty. some are not, some are undecided. that is why we're here, to learn from you because the senate will make up its own mind. the politburo candidate member said, no, it is too important, so you do not leave it to them making up their own mind, tell them this is too important, no debates, just go back and ratified it. the senator explained it does not work that way in the u.s. senate. the russians are getting kind of frustrated and exasperated, and said, listen, this is not

something you allow them to make up their minds on. invoke discipline. senator, getting also a little frustrated, explained there is no discipline. the united states senate is not operate that way. there is no discipline to be in front, and therefore we have have these discussions. the member finally threw down his map and said, listen, he said, it costs millions of dollars to run for the senate, right? said that was true. can you tell them, if they do not ratify the treaty, you do not give them the money? [laughter] cia would have no trouble understanding each other and knowing how the senate operates. he obviously had not gone to get briefed on how the senate operates, but he had very strong views. the same exists in united states, in every country in the world.

i remember right after 9/11 i was in washington, attending a speech even by the vice president, and the deck and the -- deputy secretary of defense. i was stunned. i heard the deputy secretary of defense who was an ardent neocon explained that -- explain that iraqis had met weapons of mass distortion and we were going to invade. what the arab leaders appeared the most was the democracy -- loving populations they were -- the masses would rise up and demand elections, that democratic elections would take place, there would be a cascade of elections to the arab world culminating in democracy in palestine and within a few years a peace agreement with israel. i remember being so stunned i did not know where to start. nobody had gone to the national intelligence council and said is

there any semblance of rationality to the scenario that was being spoken of at the highest levels of the u.s. government? was notourse it invited, to strategic assessment, was not done. inbe bipartisan on this, 2009, 2010, the current administration is deciding whether to have a surge in afghanistan. the question was, should we have counterterrorism, which is an orort to diminish terrorism, counterinsurgency, which is an effort to win hearts and minds which would resist islamic extremism. to gocision was made counterinsurgency and have it last for 18 months. had someone come to me and said we were trying to change in one generation, 18 years, a culture of afghanistan to reject

corruption, to accept the role of women, to accept a representative government, and to resist this kind of islamic years,sts, i said, 18 i'm not sure. are difficult, but possible. to do it in 18 months is not serious and does not rest -- reflect strategic intelligence work. a word about the snowden controversy. alert for the olympics? on this.rong views managing national security requires we have an intelligence capacity. if you do not accept that, then that kind of -- we will part ways at the start. one of the things you do when you join the community is you make a promise and commitment not to die vault us might information. the premise is two things. one is that we should not have

-- we should have intelligence capacity and in order to operate it you have to maintain confidentiality. leaking by consumers is one thing, and that is not what happened. most reporters say that 95% of the leaking in any administration comes from the top, from the white house and the national security council. it usually comes because of disagreements on policy views, usually trying to show that the policy decision made is wrong by leaking intelligence or showing that it was right by leaking intelligence, and the net result is almost bad, almost always bad because it tells our enemies what we are doing and how we got to that conclusion, what our methods are. helps our enemies. it is not good. manning and snowden were not leakers. nor were they whistleblowers. whistleblowers expose illegal behavior, and nothing that they have done has been deemed to be

illegal. both of them exhibited a severe, a serious resentment of the entire concept of secret intelligence, and they sought to expose it. all three branches of government have all determined that from what we have learned from snowden that no laws were violated. especially that two intelligence committees in the house and senate have backed up the administration in saying everything that was done was legal. maybe it should not be legal, but it was legal, and that is our guarantee. that is how are our system works. the executive branch operates, informs key members of the intelligence community, they oversee it, and determine whether it is ok to proceed, whether it is legal or not, and you have to abide by that and you cannot substitute your own personal judgment. the question is often posed by the media, was snowden a hero or

traitor? i think the right answer lies on the traitor side of that question. should notaccess he have had. he was a technical administrator. he managed programs and processes of which he had no substantive involvement. if he had grievances over that, he could go to the intelligence community and say i think improper things are taking place. that is the safety valve. and for the record, to reiterate, but committees sustained the administration very strongly on this. suppose all that the not work. them,n could have exposed then arrested, and stood on their principal, but on contrary he spent months gathering information and made elaborate diorts to die vault sure --

vulge vast reams of information he had no idea what was in it. you cannot run your law firm, your university, business or anything else by saying i do not like what is going on here, so i will take a whole bunch of secrets of this organization and make them public. without even knowing what they are. to me that is not a principled stand. those are the actions of a narcissistic criminal. guynd it ironic that this has taken refuge in china and in russia, those bastions of law and respect for institutional behavior. fact, the damage done to the united states is done in ways we will never know. however, the intelligence briefing which on the record that general clapper even earlier said since the sources and methods have been compromise, american lives have ger, put in jaeger -- dan

and the propensity for ally stewart with us has been diminished. if you think we need to have an intelligence plastic, this fellow did not do the united states any favors at all. he betrayed his country. having said that, i think the intelligence community made two snowden in managing that we learn from. one we've talked about we could've talked about these programs early on. i think the parameters of what were there should have been divulged. after a terrorist attack, you cannot do enough as big notch, cannot throw enough money at the intelligence community, and what you do is yours what we are going to do, broad parameters, so there is no discovery when a leak takes place. the second thing is we should have installed a security system on data that worked so a low-level contractor like this

could not have done so much damage without being detected. i think the solemn nature of the agreements made cannot be broken. see, let me just move on to an example that i think shows what it is. you think of an act of conscience, and it calls me that people say this is a principled human being who did what he thought was right. i think of martin luther nailing to the churchises in wittenberg in 1571 and then saying, here i stand, god help me. that is principle, doing something you believe in and standing by your word. this ties that i have no idea what is in their, so here it is, and i'm off to china and russia to seek refuge.

enough on that. i think about half of the 100,000 americans in the intelligence community, our anger is justified, and we feel betrayed. one of the best terms in intelligence that i loved is the term a way forward. sender process, whatever you have a problem, and this happened, it is a mess, what are we going to do now? this was a bad decision, this guy did not do his job, this should have been included in here, a huge mess. you have to end this with the way forward, but sooner or later, what is the way forward? we got to stop licking the winds. now what are we going to do with that? it is one of the best part of the memo you read cap ok, enough bemoaning of all this, now what are we going to do? a couple things about the way forward. i think we need an intelligence

capacity in the united states immense to the american leadership responsibilities during this time, this unique time of american power, and in the world. our intelligence ought to be up to serving that opportunity to the united states. the ingredients of this effect of intelligence capacity are there, but they require constant attention. they require attention from the electedrom our representatives, and different communities. the world affairs councils and people like you who care what our intelligence community is doing. we have to have an informed citizenry, and they have to understand what this is an give their support or their criticism to the intelligence community. requires active support from the president of the united states, real, serious delegation to the director of national intelligence, who should be required to manage strong congressional and media

relations. the american public and our allies want to have, want to believe in a professionally skilled, morally disciplined intelligence immunity, and we have an excellent intelligence community. it is changing rapidly, but we can be proud of it. this is an outstanding group of men and women who serve in exemplary fashion. all i can say is if your are on the inside, if you are proud to be there,, we are making progress. the other side is we can never be comfortable. we demand a lot, but benefit nor mostly from the skill of the diverse american population. they operate without being known what they do. their families, neighbors, have no idea how they are contribute into our well-being. i come back to the strategic focus, the need for long-term perspective. follow those two, we will be in

great shape. i hope looking forward, looking down the road, our national leaders in the future prove themselves to be as capable of using our intelligence community as that intelligence community is capable of serving the united states. and i would be pleased to take questions, if we think we have time for them. [applause] >> one of the things that disturbs most people about the snowden affair was how could a low-level contractor get access to the information that was so profoundly damaging to this country and what steps are being taken to prevent this. >> yes, another question?

the inadequate answer is that he was a program administrator. just as in your office you have somebody come in who knows nothing about what your job is him but can't take apart your computer system, find out what acrossg, and have access the board. that is how it happened. i am saying he was a program at ministry under, and therefore, through his administration and by recent news we have learned that having some people who gave him passwords that he should not have been given, he was able to get in and get access to massive amounts of information that he never should have had access to. my second point of what we can do going forward, put in safeguards. just as private manning never should've been able to do the wikileaks to the extent that he not knowtill do everything he has and we are so worried about what it may involve. it is a parcel of information,

it is something we really need to fix. two items, one is talk a lot little bit about cyber security, and government trying to do with it, but also the corporate world, and, secondly, these do the jimmy carter, please. [laughter] >> [as jimmy carter] i have always said that our country would be better off if we had people like peter kelly serving our country. [applause] [as himself] is very threatening. let mem a let -- look,

give you a little data on this. are cyber system was designed to enable -- our cyber system was designed to enable and convey and allow people to enter it. it was not set up for security. every minute there are 3 million google searches in the world. llion internetbi users in the world. e-mails daily going round the world. this was not meant for security. it was meant for open can vacation. the evildoers, both nationstate and hackers, and get inside such compromise,n jump, go from internet communications to operating systems. yes, it is frightening when you know about it. i have been working on a project right now at the suggestion of the connecticut governor to look at how this could affect our public utilities.

of those who would do us harm to enter into and compromise such systems, "the new york times" called it the class job of industry. jaw of industry. some countries have stolen very valuable events secrets. others go there to copy programs and get designs, things like that. the united states intelligence community does not conduct espionage on behalf of american business. it does not take place. world ink at this which both offense and defense takes place. one of the most profound events in the last several years was to lie 2010 -- was july 2010, the

stoxuxnet in operation. system jumped to the siemens operating system in attack phase.into i do not know who did stuxnet. statesreported united and israel were involved. i do not want to go there. that kind of attack which can shut down a massive capacity followed by soon thereafter a massive attack on aramco in saudi arabia which wiped out 30,000 computers, the scope for damage is huge, and if you think of suppose you lost electricity, suppose you lost a gas pipeline coming up to the northeast during the weather we are having now, that pipeline generates electricity. heat were without gas to

by an electricity generation, where would we be? it is an act of war. it is a defense posture that we have to take all the time. we live without understanding both the vulnerability and the potential for such damage. it is another one of those things that we do not always understand the luxury that we have in the united states and the vulnerability that requires accidents all the time. b fridley to your local security agent. he or she is trying to help you. very, veryty is real, something that will be part of our future going forward. we are not going to turn into an authoritarian state in order to stay secure. that would deny the basic fiber of the american society. but the liberties that we and joy -- enjoy bring those insecurities that we have to defend against. >> thank you. the americanhink policy should be back in europe

as we have seen with lithuania with the struggle between the --sian -- speak russian-speaking half of the three main -- of lithuania and withther half sympathizing europe? to give the other side the tools they needed to make that decision. out, toseen this play keep the russian tanks busy for the afternoon. what auc as that struggle satellites being pulled back into the russian getting backt us into a checkpoint charlie confrontation? >> you mean lithuania, not the ukraine? >> i meant ukraine. sorry. --there is an obvious with

obviously. the president of ukraine vetoed the agreement with western is veryand ukraine divided between those who would rather have their economic and integration, their political affiliation, or culture hide to russia and those who would like to turn to the west. it is playing out right now, 25 killed this morning, an obvious hot spot. this is one of those -- we need two things. this is where you need the national intelligence council, what is at play, what we think is going to affect the outcome, what are the range of policy decisions that are open to us, and then you need a wise decision. we cannot intervene in all these crises of the world. it could be very bloody, and to go in there into direct confrontation with russia at this point, obvious reasons not to do this.

our hearts obviously are with the western-leading ukrainians. they would like to return to europe, which is our way of looking at things. one of the wise thing to do through intelligence is decide not what you do, but what you do not do, and there are times when there are crises that you just better not enter unless you are ready for a full-fledged consultation -- confrontation that could create american casualties. up to now, the united states has done the right thing. it is difficult when you send encouragement, which we have done in the past, to one side to say hang in there, you're doing the right thing, we are with you. a lot of people interpret that as meaning the yanks are coming, they're coming here to help us, let's go to the barricades, and then you find out we were just kind of wishing you well. not onlyicult to watch your strategic decisions but all the words that have been made to describe it. and up to this point i think

united states has made it clear this is an internal division and also not one in which we are going to give specific encouragement or discouragement to one side or the other. at this point, it is there to sort out for themselves. >> i would like to have you talk more about human intelligence. i remember the 1970's, and their seemed to be -- there seem to be an emphasis on technical means and human intelligence, and perhaps the arak war and 9/11 brought emphasis to human intelligence, and you pointed out the difference between knowledge and what we do with it. it seems united states has been behind the pace and react if to the green revolution in iran, the arab spring, and i do not know whether that is policy or

knowledge, and it seems to me in the ukraine that wisdom of forethought would have strengthened the european union so they would have had an offer for the ukraine as opposed to russia coming in with $50 billion. >> covered a lot of ground there, john. john and i served together with the former director of national intelligence dennis blair when we were white house fellows together. good to see you, john. you have combined both human intelligence and analysis and national security action decisions, so when you bring this together, you have covered a lot of ground. outstandings has human intelligence capabilities. we take second place to nobody. there has been a question as to how much actual action should be delegated to the central intelligence agency versus the pentagon.

there are two separate titles. withs covert operations deniability. the other is overt action. sometimes you get the same kinds of people doing it. only difference is whether it is title x or title 50, whether the sun comes up. up, it is covered. if it does not come up, it is a covert operation. i question should our intelligence agency become as active and operator as the cia has become. they are outstanding in their analysis and in their human intelligence to understand things. let me do you an example. suppose you are in a conflict and you have learned from being in that conflict that here is somebody who clearly is operating with the enemy. you identify that person. that is human intelligence. suppose you are able then because you know who that person is to focus on his or her cell

thee indications one way or other and find out what that person is up to. and you confirm this person is making bombs, dealing with the enemy, doing things we do not want. where does this person go? that is where you can use intelligence to track where that person is, maybe find their headquarters, learn a lot. there's accommodation i was talking about, human intelligence, geospatial intelligence. and i sick minds mindset in ways in which no other country can. i like their human intelligence capacity, plus, quite honestly, we have advantages you do not find and work. i was in one country, inside the inner sanctum's where things are being done, and i noticed somebody who was clearly a native of that country inside andintelligence operations,

dressed like the natives and everything else, and when i flew back to washington, i was at dulles airport, and i looked, and there the guy was, running a business suit, and he probably lives in los angeles. we have every single nationality, every single race, everything is represented in the united states, and they are patriotic americans and they lend themselves, their linguistic abilities and the ability to blend in with the local populations, like no other country can. frankly, we are very skilled at. i like the integrative approach. you got into several different should we hadves, and each one of those is a separate question, and perhaps we should take some of them up, but you reach these do or die things seriously. syria stretchable part and a lot of people coming in. you act quickly, saying we are

going to be active here and we're going to help guide the faction that we favor the most. or you stand back. we stood back, doing some humanitarian assistance, so forth, but that is a decision that has to be made early on because it is very difficult to come in. it is one thing to do it when there are a thousand people, 2000 people involved, but it is another when there are 20,000, 50,000, and when you do innervation it makes it a different thing. the wisdom to make those decisions, but i hope i have covered the integration and the role of human intelligence and the other sectors for you. i would be glad to talk about those others afterwards. >> would you comment on the significant amount of intelligence activities that are being outsourced to private industry and whether you think that is a good idea. >> sure. i once directed a team of about

80 people and one of my jobs. work in private industry. you cannot tell the difference. they had a green blanch -- badge versus a blue badge. one team. in general it is good, why? because a lot of the progress being made in information technology is being done in the private sector. we have really right people. you have people competing for government contracts who can do it better. and wee enormous skills, benefit from that. sometimes they come to work for us. sometimes we give them a contract. from my experience, all i have seen is that the united states is by far the benefactor of having included all the scientific, technological information progress that exists

by the contractors that we bring on board. it goes to things like information technology. linguistics to area specialties. you better be careful, obviously. you go inside an intelligence facility, a duncan doughnuts, and even though they are employees that have been cleared, everything you do has to go through a security clearance. sometimes people think you are outsourcing this to a private contractor, oh my goodness, that is not a security risk. usually it is not. but the capacity, the potential for strength that they bring into the equation is a huge resource in the community, and we have benefited tremendously from it. my summary answer is it has been a good deal for the united states. >> last question. >> that was the last one.

thanks very much. >> chuck hagel yesterday announced that to the size of military forces. in a portion of monday's endocrine -- pentagon briefing. we seek a highly rated a -- ready and capable army, able to dominate any opponent across the full spectrum of operations. the army must accelerate the pace and increase the spate -- the scale of its postwar -- today there are 520,000 active-duty soldiers, which the army had planned to reduce to 490,000. mr. geagea choices in management inthe strategic choices management review both determined that since we are no longer sizing the force for prolonged stability operations and army of this size is larger than required to make -- meet the demands of our strategy. given the reduced budgets, is

also larger than we can afford to modernize and keep ready. we have decided to further reduce active duty strength to a 450,000 soldiers. i accept the recommendations to terminate the current ground directducal program and the funds to a new platform. i have asked the leadership of the army and marine corps to deliver new visions for vehicle modernization by the end of this fiscal year. the changes to and a smaller army. but would help ensure the army remain well-trained and clearly superior in arms and equipment. this smaller capacity entails additional risk, even if we execute extended or simultaneous ground operations, our analysis showed that this

force would be capable of decisively defeating integration in one major combat theater as it must be supporting air and naval forces engaged in another theater against an adversary. if cuts are reimposed in 2016, the active-duty army would have to draw down to 420,000 soldiers. the army national guard and reserves will also draw down in order to maintain a balanced force. today, the number is about 355,000 soldiers and the reserves about 205,000 soldiers. by 2017, under our recommendations, it would be 335,000 soldiers in the army national guard and 195,000 in the reserves. if sequestration returns, the army national guard would

continue drawing down further to 315,000. army reserves to 185,000. we have protected the national guard and reserves from cuts to the extent possible, but in order to maintain a ready and capable force and time of fiscal constraints, no component of dod can be entirely exempted from reduction. this 5% recommendation in guards and soldiers is smaller than the 13% reduction in active-duty soldiers. i am mindful that many in the community and congress have argued that the reserve component should be protected from cuts because they provide more troops at a lower cost. if our priority was having the largest possible force in the event of a large-scale prolonged war, that would be reasonable. however, our defense strategy calls for more than that.

surge capacity is just one factor. as we must prioritize readiness, capability, and agility, and while it is true that reserve units are less expensive when not mobilized, our analysis shows a reserve unit is roughly the same cost as an active-duty unit when mobilized. they perform well in afghanistan and iraq and we cannot have achieved what we did without them. experience shows the specialties achieve greater collective training to combat. it should reside in a full-time force where the capabilities will be more ready and available to commanders. >> we are joined by a reporter who reports on defense cuts.

do you think we will see the same conflicts with this new cuts?of clots -- same sortt to see the of battles appear, pay raise, military benefits, even equipment they have suggested. congress has made it clear they are not fond of it. the dod has their work cut out that this is needed. specificallyioned programs like the 8 -- 10 -- a-10 aircraft? >> last year the the plane was designated for cuts. i would expect to see the same fight there. know how much light there has been on that.

we're seeing this in a lot of the programs, some of the tri-care cuts they have suggested, some of the pay raises they suggested. dod keeps coming back and saying these are necessary moves, and congress says they are not things we would prefer. >> why is that? >> it is parochial. some of the folks who have bases in their backyard are fighting to keep them. there are old veterans who support them. sometimes it is just election politics. nobody wants to be seen cutting benefits to veterans or troops in an election year or even off election years. that is why we have seen up until last year whatever pay raise that dod has come up with, congress has come up with one that is a little higher.

say we have to keep this under control. >> are their regions of the country that would be affected more than others by the proposed cuts? >> there are few bases that would be hit harder, as equipment is moved from guard units to active-duty units. in the army and some of the services. there would be some of those effects. right now we are seeing the top line big nature items. the biggest things that are jumping up to us are general pay and benefit issues that would affect everyone. >> the associated press says secretary hagel wants to decrease the size of the force to about 450,000 soldiers. any opposition there from congress? hawkshave had a lot of who have said it is getting too small number. they said it is not enough staffing, not enough people if we get into a major conflict. -- hastagon has tendered

countered that new people cost money and they cannot afford to keep that many people on in a wartime footing. there will be fights, conversations about what is the right number for each of the services, talking about significant cuts to the marine corps. we will see fights on just about everything as he gets up to the hill. >> have we seen plans similar to this before like with donald rumsfeld prior to 9/11? >> i am not sure about that and what was being proposed. 9/11 changed everything overnight. we did see secretary gates and secretary panetta push these specific proposals with tri-care fees with some of the benefit rollbacks. they were met with mixed success. it is very easy for congress to give out extra money when it looks like they are being magnanimous when it comes time to pay for it and it becomes tougher for everyone. >> what happens with the budget

proposal from here, the proposal from secretary hagel, where does it go now? >> next monday we will see the rollout of the federal budget proposals. secretary hagel gave some of the themes and you will see people attacking the nitty-gritty specifics. it will head up to the hill and there are some authorization bills. chairman mckeon said that he has committed this year to making sure that his committee's work on the defense authorization bill get done by october 1. it would be the second time in the last decade they have been able to get the budget bill done on time. we will see. there is usually plenty of fights not just tween dod and congress but the house in the senate. >> you can read his work it armytimes.com. thanks for the insight.

>> all that briefing at www.c-span.org. looking at the u.s. capitol. the house will dabble in in about 10 minutes. inthe house will gavel in about 10 minutes. the 2015 budget now, with jason furman, the chairman of the council of economic advisers. he spoke this morning about some of the proposals announced next week in the budget. here is some of what he had to say. >> first, in his budget this year, the president is writing the discretionary levels to what was agreed in the ryan-murray agreement. one of the levels is just how hard and painful the choices are to write a budget to that level. for that reason, in addition to writing a budget to that level, the president also is proposing

on top of that an opportunity, growth, and security initiative that would make additional 2-15 splitin fy between defense and nondefense priorities, focusing in areas like basic research, job training, and national security, and financed with a balanced package of tax loophole closures and spending reforms over the next 10 years. the president continues to look for ways to make even more sustained investments in our productivity, and one of the highest priorities in that regard is our nations's infrastructure. and the president will once again propose an ambitious multi-year infrastructure reauthorization plan. at the same time we are not waiting for congress to act.

issued anhe president executive order directing more transparency and accountability in the infrastructure permitting process, and in the weeks and months ahead we will be building on that progress to make sure that projects are getting started as quickly as possible. at the same time, we are going to be pushing to finance that infrastructure patch age -- package with a transition to reformed business tax system, a step that would also benefit the economy, both in the short run and the long run. is this tax reform would cut the top rate to 20%, broaden the base, and reform the business tax code. in the process it would expand the economy's potential by reducing distortions in the current system that skew investment decisions. moreover, that tax reform would be revenue neutral over the

medium and long run, but transitioning to the new system raises some one-time revenue, and that is what we would use to finance the one-time investments in infrastructure. to physical capital, it is also essential that we invest in human capital for education and -- already the president has given states new incentives to improve -12 education. to build on this progress, the president has repeated his call for providing every american child with the opportunity to attend a high-quality preschool, which is not something you will see in our growth rate next year or the year after, but could make a profound difference in decades to come. at the same time, we need to focus on every aspect of education, from preschool all the way through job-training programs and expanded aspects to

apprenticeships. among the most important policy proposals to enhance the economy's productivity and long run output is immigration reform. at a basic level, immigration reform would help counteract the slower growth of the labor force by eliminating existing backlogs for employment-based green cards and making it easier for foreign-born individuals getting advanced degrees to stay here after they graduate. one of the things i think economically is most exciting about immigration is not just that it expands the workforce, but that it also expands per capita gdp and it expands per capita gdp i expanding total factor of productivity growth. research has found that cemigrants patent at twi

the rate of american-born citizens. spillovern also has benefits for native inventors with research findings that activity across eight is tied to dash across state is tied to changes in immigrant populations. immigrants are more likely to start a business and engage in other forms of entrepreneurship. cbo affirmed this view when it evaluates it the senate-past immigration bill, finding the total factor of predict tuesday would be a full percentage point under the2033 legislation. and these innovations can translate into significant economic outcomes. 500 companiestune were started by immigrants or their children. while we are trying to attract

inventors and entrepreneurs from overseas to the united states, we are also focused on selling more u.s.-made products the other direction. by completing new free trade agreements with asia and europe. the transpacific hardship has -- partnership has a significant day be the most significant generationation in a because includes 12 countries that are home to, and 700 and 93 million consumers -- 793 million consumers. together with the transatlantic trade investment partnership, which also offers major potential, allowing us to build on the more than 400 billion dollars a year in goods and services that our economy exports to the european union. to make these new trade agreements a reality, the president has called on congress to enact trade promotion

authority, a practice that extends back 30 years and allows congress to set out negotiating objectives while ensuring that final agreements will receive an up or down vote. finally, all these policies are part of an overall fiscally responsible framework. our deficit has come down sharply in the short run. the longme down in run. our debt will be declining as a share of the economy for the next several years. after 2018, that that will start rising as a share of the economy, which is why we will be putting forward a more balanced measures on both revenue and the expenditure side to ensure that tot debt is continuing decline. >> later in our program schedule, we will take you live to the u.s. house. mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: mr.