technology. none of that was provided, so we have to pay out of other ip projects. the hundred million is primarily for dealing with information issues, designing of systems, making sure they work. one reason it is my priority is i am committed we will this time next year have an effective filing. we did that at the front and. it is a major challenge. we are finding other areas. >> the amount requested was for 40. how much does the irs spend annually on implementation of the affordable care act? how much does it project to spend? >> i can get that with what we are spending. one of the issues that is going to happen to us i have talked to people about is starting late in the fall but certainly next year, because it is a new requirement, we are going to have a lot of inquiries from

preparers as well as taxpayers if they are in the area of being eligible for a premium tax credit, and even if they aren't, making sure they are comfortable filling out at return. we have started the public information campaign this week. we will spend the rest of the week getting preparers and taxpayers comfortable. 70 or eight -- 80% aren't going to have anything at all. a big chunk of people will not be affected. we will get you and the committee the information over how much we have spent for i.t. or personnel. what are we spending this year, and what do we expect the

requirements are going to be in the next year or two? >> i am sure when you next appear before us there will be a lot of discussion about the dollars necessary. >> i wanted to ask about bonuses. making sure bonuses are being given to employees who have shown improved performance or goals they have met. have you taken -- we put some language together. have you taken the language to make sure the bonuses would be rewarded to those who showed employee performance and productivity? >> they are performance awards.

the goal is one percent of compensation. the performance judgments are made by managers, not by the employees themselves, and the history is that those awards have gone to about two thirds of the employees who do not get any. the average size is about $1200, so no one is making a lot of money. if i could respond to the one percent in terms of how did i come to this decision, after the decision was made to reach the sequester levels that performance awards would not be paid, they issued a governmentwide edict that one percent performance awards could be made. my predecessor decided while the contract provided with the bargaining unit performance awards, a pool of 1.75%, that we thought negotiation ability changed that number and the number went to zero. the union filed a grievance, and unfair label -- labor practice, and a lawsuit. in the process, i hope we will have that agreement settled. we have been negotiating about

what the performance pool ought to be going forward. >> what does that mean? the number of people eligible? >> the bargaining unit is thousands of employees. you take the salary, and what is the pool? >> these aren't merit-based? >> these are performance awards based on merit. the size of the pool available for awards was set at 1.75%. >> that will get a performance award? >> 1.75% was the pool. each individual was evaluated. the judgment was made.

about two thirds were eligible for performance awards. the average award was about $1200. one third of them were not eligible because they had not performed determined by the manager, and the question is what is the size of the pool or whether there would be a pool or not. -- a pool at all. the decision was no pool. they decided they would drop the unfair labor practice and drop the lawsuit, and we would pay not 1.75 into a pool that one percent. in terms of how we are able to do that, we had in our budget funding for that, because as a result of the sequester, we lost another 1300 people, and on an annual basis, that provides part of the revenues we need. we have made more assumptions about cuts and other expenses of about four percent, and the arrangement with the union is we will not pay those awards in the fiscal year the way we have always done it.

we pay managers two or three months after the fiscal year into the next one, so we are moving the bargaining unit awards into the next fiscal year. this year we are only going to pay one pool award. that's how it fits into the budget. >> really quickly, reclaiming my time. >> i was going to give you two minutes. >> what i am interested in understanding is -- i think if someone is eligible for a reward because they have shown based on their merit and hard work that they deserve it, i am fine with that. my issue is you said the managers make the decision. i assume you have issued guidance whereby they can use some kind of criteria to make this. >> there is an agencywide performance plan run by the human capital office. >> there is a follow-up to make sure there is not a manager saying, so the people have actually met these awards because they received these performance awards who are the subject of investigations.

i want to make sure that moving forward these awards are appropriate. that's where my question is. >> i asked the question myself to make sure for managers when we pay a performance award we need to be comfortable the system is actually rewarding performance. employees know who is performing and who is not, and if you make rewards for people who are not performing, that's not good for morale either. we have a sophisticated system, and your point is taken that we need to a value weighted to make sure we are comfortable, that this isn't lake will be gone -- lake wobegone, and everyone is above average. we could do this within the budget. these are employees who haven't had a pay raise in four years, who have been subject to a lot of difficulties over the last year, and ultimately, 75% of our budget is people. without the people the work isn't going to get done.

part of the reason i am wandering around the country in the middle of winter is to remind those employees we value their work. they are terrifically dedicated. some of them have been around 20, 30 years working on this. their only concern is can we get them the resources to provide better taxpayer services. if in saving us the risk of having to pay more in that pool and being able to time it in a different way i can send a signal to the employees that we value their work, it seems to me that was appropriate. >> with that, i yield back. >> anybody have any other questions? i think we are about to move into panel two. let me say to you, commissioner, thank you. i know how busy you are. think you for being here today. we know what a difficult job you have, and sometimes we lose sight of the good things the irs does, that you do every day under difficult circumstances.

collecting the revenues, talking to folks, answering questions, chasing down the bad guys, all the things you do every day, we very much appreciate, and we are here to help you do that even better, so think you for the time. this concludes the first panel, and we will have the second panel, on. thanks so much. >> thank you, mr. chairman. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] demo we are at the u.n. where a closed-door meeting -- there was a security council meeting yesterday as well at the request of ukraine created this is the second one in many days. the cameras are here and we planned to take you to any

speakers that take the podium throughout the day here on c-span. meanwhile, the spokesman for the un's secretary-general tells reporters that the u.n. is "gravely concerned" about the situation and plans to talk about it with president vladimir putin and. -- vladimir putin. the situation in ukraine is very grave. senator bob corker of tennessee says -- we will continue to bring up -- we will continue to bring you updates on the c-span network. >> c-span, we bring public affairs events from washington directly to you, putting you in the room of congressional hearings, white house events, briefings and conferences, and offering complete gavel-to-gavel coverage of the u.s. house of all as a public service to private industry.

there c-span, created by cable tv industry 30 years ago and funded by your local cable satellite provider. watches on tv, like us on facebook, and follow us on twitter. new c-span.org website makes it easier than ever to keep tabs on washington dc and share your finds via facebook, twitter, and other social networks. easy search functions allow you to ask us our daily coverage of events. new tools make it simple to create short video clips and share them with your friends come up yet facebook, twitter, and other social networks. you can send links to your video clips fayette e-mail -- to your video clips via e-mail. watch washington on the new c-span.org. if you see something of interest, clip it and share it with your friends. >> next, a discussion about the

future of afghanistan as the u.s. prepares to draw down its presence. this panel focuses specifically on media coverage in the region. from the u.s. institute of peace, this is a little more than an hour. >> good morning, everyone. thank you for coming to this discussion about the united states relationship with afghanistan. i will be moderating this second panel, which will be a little bit looser because i am a tv guide. i like to walk around with the microphone and things like that. ourll and should use distinct panel. i wanted to say a couple of things and show you a little bit of videotape. being a television person i cannot resist doing that. spent 17 months

201110 and 11 -- 2010 and serving the united states embassy in kabul as the director of diplomacy. like many others in the room i fell in love with afghanistan and the afghan people. there were three things i noticed in the area of the afghan media that struck me in perhaps it will help us get started here. the first thing, which led me to the after job of the job i have now, seeing that there was a program on the evening news on the radio television of .fghanistan, rta it's very late -- it's very able leader is with us today. the voice of america has an hour of news every evening.

what struck me was it was a very well put together program. all my afghan friends watched it. effectiveness of that conversation and that reliable news may quite an impression on me. and i thinkhing -- everyone in the room, if you follow afghanistan or afghan media issues, had been struck by this one time or another -- is the extraordinary adventure lo-tv. to the enthusiasm and energy that that private company has brought to the afghan media scene -- more about that in a minute. they are not the only ones. there are something like 75 television stations and 175 radio stations. either normal sleeve

vigorous, varied conversation going on on the airways and in afghanistan. largest but be the it is one of many. that is a notable piece of media landscape. the third thing is as an embassy thecial i went around country and often visited tiny in villages and small towns around afghanistan. there are a lot of them. going to a one-room fm station and a small town but does not have to much going for it and you find young people at the microphone finding some way to get a little bit and music on with a basic tape recorder. in many cases the stations were help ofby locals with

ngos, which is resented by some of interviews. while they run some local -- ent, maybe have another green shoot and a strong one, an important one. a varied source of strength for afghanistan going forward. we are here in this panel to discuss what i think is one of the most important advances over the last 12 years. we have heard from many others in the previous panel. i am a little biased because i spent nearly 30 years in the business of journalism. i am's dill sort of in it. of speech, if you don't

have that you ain't got much. have a democracy, which afghanistan seeks to be. it is a sense that people might say what they think and that the media, maybe there are some limits but fundamentally they can do so as well. that weat the subject would like to get us to talk about. i want to talk about how we can support the media sector in afghanistan going forward. that, it is not just about journalists and journalism. it as that presented sector is here, the media is more than just good newscasts. it is entertainment. it is informing. it is storytelling. in that spirit i think that the

effort we have seen over the last 12 years by many different countries, different different support systems, has been much broader than trying to provide freedom of speech and the news. that, for me, is job one. it is also helping the media to become a full part of the country's culture and its strength. in that spirit i wanted to show a seven minute clip from a wonderful new documentary produced by a young australian filmmaker. some of you may have seen this. to broaden the discussion, he recep and minutes from the network. a documentary focused on

television and some of the broader issues of journalism, of women, and other topics that are important. focuses on a particular television show. roll the film. them -- >> right here it is very ambitious.

them our instructions once -- >> our instructions was this is -- it was such a huge production. it was shooting on the streets of kabul. they have [indiscernible] caught him.

every shot getting faster and faster. thought oure we actor was dead. it was frightening. , the ministryer of agriculture want to to delay everything you shot down today. we packed up our entire shoot in five minutes. when we were doing eagle four, we had cuts and burns, you name it. i asked what can you do and we had a chat about it. she said she would practice.

>> i think it is only hurting from a set toght afghanistan to a set in any other country without any problem. she is just fabulous. cool x -- clacks we were trying to lift the profile of the

afghanistan security forces. we can't guarantee people safety. they need to know that once the , thatational forces go their security forces are adequate enough. cool x the idea was to promote -- to promote integrity and creating heroes you can trust. >> 76% say -- attitudes have there wasr the better a noticeable spike in recruitment. it was highly successful. cool x people are going to have

to know the police are working for them. >> great. never let it be said we don't have entertainment value here at this conference. the afghanistan stoned have a sense of the theatrical. to read aso like quote before i introduce the panel. this was by dora townsend. this is in foreign affairs. wrote when western legal technicians are asked about these programs they them as adismiss sideshow of institutional say building. audience surveys suggest the shows have made a powerful impression, comparing their own

police, lawyers, and judges to the more virtuous ones on he mentionslevision another show, crime scenes. he says producers receive hundreds of photos calls asking authorities to look into -- i just want to broaden its slightly. what we talk about when we talk about the afghan medium? we have a strong panel to talk about this with us. bergen, director of the national security program of the new american foundation, author of manhunt, the longest war, the , ama bin laden that i knew personal friend we work together at cnn and have been friends for decades.

next to him, the director of the .fghan analyst safety committee in his own right, a distinguished afghan journalist and patriot. he has worked for the washington post, new york times, pnr. he also understands the western media and its oddities. left, the director and founder of the afghan news. one of the bedrock afghan need yet institutions that has been founded in the last 12 years. strength for so many other media organizations. have good radio televisions if you don't have a service or two. those of us in radio know that's

too well. we simply cannot cover everything. that is impossible but it is amazing how much they do and the quality of the work. ofis also the 2008 winner the press freedom award of the committees for journalists, and other great afghan patriot. to the far end, from the united at bbc, james dean action. he represents competition in a way. james worked with others on probably the test survey and study on this date of the afghan media not too long ago. he has some interesting findings from that and strong views about what we need to do going forward. by -- let me start

with you. how strong is the afghan media at this point and how worried are you about its future? >> thank you. thank you for organizing this important event. negative --e from a i hear some positive things. peoplewords of american , i am so government

happy. we believe we are not alone. we have support. start -- one of the .ecent examples is one story barbershop, i was he bought a house for a family of four $6,000. fighting -- he sold it for $4000. if we did not have an accepted he says that if we

have not an acceptable election it is mean his future will be -- he wanted to keep those 400,000 -- $4000 in order to transfer his family from one side to the other. now our future is different. -- it does not mean our future will be dangerous. our journalists will be worried and our people will be worried. these two things are very important and it is like a bridge for us.

we had a good achievement and afghan media. if we compare during the taliban -- they were just tell a band radio stations. now we have 1000 media outlets. is how do weion keep that? how are we learning that? i hope if we have a good election, i think our future will be well and good. think we can have good success in our country. >> same question. how strong is the afghan media, how important is it to the country, how worried are you about its future? >> it is very strong if we look

at the fact that today's afghan media is only the product of the last 10 years. as -- rally have media we only had one radio during the taliban and two papers which were so lowly being used for propaganda purposes. in terms of highlighting priorities for the central government, in terms of putting human rights, promoting women in terms of holding the politicians accountable, it is very strong. we have to look at the afghan media before 2001. extremely important for afghanistan because afghanistan on the path started of democracy.

we will not be able to have much success in building democracy in the country. it has its own weaknesses. one of the important weaknesses of the afghan government is lack of strategic vision towards immediate outlets. that will lead to the bankruptcy of a significant number of media outlets. it is because there will be an amount of reduction in -- a major sorts -- major source of funding. >> that is what i want to get to.

how worried are you looking forward about the future of the afghan media and you have any sense of how many stations may close if they lose foreign support? >> knowledge is success. i think it is an extraordinary achievement. it is an astonishing achievement. a tradition of afghan journalism goes back to 1911. there was nothing in 2001. 10,000 people are employed in the sector. saturated with a number of radio stations that exists. this is very much down to the and -- to the energy and entrepreneurialism and courage .f people

it is a big success story. it is also being built on external support. it is really dependent on that in a significant way. , it isi add something it ise to something -- also due to president karzai, who has opened up the space and for free discussion and many voices. >> with the most -- it is quite extraordinary. how worried am i? really worried. this is built on a lot of external support. appear to be drying up. market is something

like $30 million per year. likely $20 million per year. sustain the scale of media that exists in the country. only two things are likely to happen if the support continues to dry up in the way it appears to be doing. the media will consolidate and shrink. perhaps that needs to happen anyway. it will start to fall into the comparedthose who are to pay for it. to find theult evidence around us. the second biggest supporter is iran. seere beginning to something we map uncharted, a

transition we published in 2012. we are beginning to see it cooperation of media. if it isn't managed in an intelligent and constructive way , there is this astonishing legacy that is being built. is that legacy going to be secured? there are real threats of that legacy at the moment. yes, we are worried. , iran,he neighbors pakistan, others. what sort of role are they playing now in the afghan media space and what are your thoughts about that going forward? >> i think it is interesting to compare pakistan and afghanistan. president karzai has been very liberal with licenses in

afghanistan. one of the good things he did was create the space for prayer -- four free press. there is an interesting comparison between pakistan and afghanistan. freedom of press and afghanistan is some ways better than it is in it pakistan. for thebe inconceivable government to expel a new york times journalist who had been in the country for six years and was a leading journalist for the times. is what happened in pakistan relatively recently. as a western journalist tried to , your visa was -- who couldr friends not report on very large chunks of the country. he really can't report in the

tribal regions. independent journalists can go where they want. , i think point journalists routinely find it if not the most dangerous country in the world, probably the second most dangerous after syria. there are some good things going on in the media. the situation in afghanistan looks a lot better. >> you talked about iranian money coming in, pakistani money coming in. and you quantify that at all? quantify it.n i don't think it is researched well enough. i think we need to be careful about what the effects are. evidence that the channels that that money is supporting are beginning to pocket quite a lot of money. -- weince we've are

published the port 18 months ago, they are getting more traction. although this has not been a polarized media environment we heard about how a lot of the coverage around elections wasn't particularly polarized. there are undoubtedly concerns around the future of where this is going to be. fragile my work is on states in general. fragile states tend to be fractured state. and we are seeing an increase in the fragmented and fractured media in afghanistan and the most fractured part of that getting quiteably significant injections of funding at the moment. if the last length -- it is the that isng for a state trying to chart its own national identity -- it is not

necessarily a useful way of going. but as the media -- but the media is becoming ever more fractured and fragile. >> how solid do you think is the support that you expect to see in terms ofection governmental support for the concept of a free media? i know there was discussion recently about freedom of the press in afghanistan. >> again, when you compare it to other countries, afghanistan has had a remarkable -- has managed to create a remarkable space of freedom of media. this is because -- we should

give credit to president karzai .or allowing this to flourish -- recently, we have been there has been pressure from the government. this mainly comes from the ministry of information and culture. and there are plenty of ways of solving the problems that the afghan media is undergoing. lack of professionalism is a problem in the way that the ministry of information and resolve the to problem is to fracture the media. with the ministry did a couple was to propose an amendment of three articles, which further restricted the space for media workers and gives sole authority to the minister -- the ministry of

information and culture to punish and try media workers that are seen as violators of the profession. not a say this is systematic attempt of the government to pressure the media. but there are a lot of individuals in the afghan government who cannot tolerate , the freedom that the afghan media is enjoying. in terms of the future of the government, it depends on who gets elected. thear, we see that candidate, they are all media friendly and they all believe in the expansion of media in the expression of media as a constructive component for state

strengtheningor the mocker see in afghanistan. >> forgive me if i put you on the spot here, -- the strengthening of the democracy in afghanistan. forgive me -- >> forgive me pepper you on the spot here, but do you think oshawa will have funding in three or five years time? you are the canary in the coal mine. will you survive three to five years from now? >> in the last 10 year, we did worked to sustain us by new subscriptions, advertisement, but we did not find enough money to land the news agencies. the news agency needs some but this and our learning in the last 10 years,

we try to focus on a new stream of revenue to sustain pajhwok. i will tell you that in our in ourin 2014 and 2015 business plan, we are focusing on new product, like election and mining websites. we want to intrude is a new subscription package for the mining company and for the politicians that will help us. that, -- besides that, we want to focus on our international revenue, which has also started. a service introduce

that will help us. we want to expand our internet service, because around 16 million afghans have access to mobile and that will help us. we would like to introduce a service to build a mobile application. 2014 theret after will be this many, but if we focus on those things, we will withoutpajhwok international money. >> thinking like a businessman. good to hear. when they were in power, the taliban used to tear up video tapes. they did not allow much media of any variety. do you think their view on media has changed out of power? it seems to me in some ways they are quite sophisticated practitioners of media now.

their internet efforts are impressive. >> yeah, i totally agree with that. i was reporting in afghanistan when the taliban were in power and everyone agreed and the panel noted that there was a radio show. also, the bbc had a correspondent in the ap and in al jazeera. but it was enormously difficult to get a visa to go as a journalist, and once you got in, they would charge a huge amounts of money tuesday in a hotel where i was the only guest. -- to stay in a hotel where i was really guest. they made it very difficult. and of course, television was banned. they have changed completely. they have a very active spokesman, who subscribes to the channel that i edit. they have learned from al qaeda in a sense about having an aggressive media campaign. how persuasive it is, i leave

that to mike -- my afghan colleagues. but certainly, they are. and they are making news. i will give you an example. the u.s. army sergeant that has been taken hostage by the haqqani network, there was some theussion of a piece in washington post about the u.s. negotiating the release of five leading to the bond prisoners from guantánamo. and the taliban about two days after this report came out very quickly said, we are not negotiating this issue at all right now. they are savvy about how to work in a global media environment. >> i guess the question is whether they are going to mature if theyevel -- and become more influential in a post-2014 afghanistan, if they hold a bit of territory, or if there are candidates that are sympathetic to the suburb on and they win a seat or two, are they

going to be part of the game? or if they will be fighting, which i guess they are in some places, if they might somehow get engaged in government and -- in governing. could they possibly tolerate other voices? could they mature to the level where they allow other people to speak as well as them in a more serious afghanistan rather than the one they run -- they ran previously? >> i think the shortest answer is, probably not. there is a lot of wishful thinking going on about the taliban. you could imagine that elements of it might be in the political process, but they are a relatively small part of the equation. the single biggest wildcard here is whether the pakistanis will a serious military operation in north waziristan. and i think for the first time in a long time that may well happen. the number of people who have been killed in pakistan by the

taliban has reached a point where the government has said, we are serious. i think i could change a lot for taliban if they no longer had a critical safe haven. obviously, they exist in afghanistan to summit -- to some degree. the window is closing to do this operation. that changes a lot of things for the taliban. >> before we get to your questions of the panel, i will ask one more to james. james -- whatink do you think, james, needs to happen going forward in terms of support for the afghan media? >> i think the biggest single thing is a clear strategy. there is not a strategy in this area. report inunched our

2012 and in lots of conversations since last year discussing this with many ambassadors, with many political leaders, with many media leaders, and many others, they all said the same thing. and that is, we've got strategies for just about everything around the transition -- for security, economy, health service, everything you can think of. we've got laces and spaces where people meet and discuss and work out what the best way of supporting the future of afghanistan is. except the media. there was no obvious place or space within the country where a clear, strategic focus can be applied on how best to secure the future legacy of what has quite a bit of money to build up. and i do find a quite remarkable and staggering. and even now, after quite a lot of time, it is not clear where

that place actually is. and that is what makes us worried. i don't think this is just an issue of lots of money. i think this is an issue of really smart for my intelligent decision-making on where the support needs to be invested, and how can colleagues like these on the panel can be of support. i personally do not think the media of afghanistan is sustainable in the short term. but the role it is playing in the future is fundamental. of the bonnussions process and everything else and there is focused about what the political leadership is going to be, what the elections are going to be. but ultimately, the future of afghanistan is going to be shaped by the people. and it really does need a platform for public debate. we talked a lot this morning

about what the nature of a national dialogue would be in afghanistan. where is that platform? uponis the foundation which the people of afghanistan are going to be engaged. it often will be difficult dialogue and debate to chart their own future destiny. i would argue this transition is one of the most fundamental for the transition of the country and it is rather absent from the planning and discussion, which i think is fragmented across the government and the media system. if i had to say one thing that needed to happen, we need to get serious, not just about money, but with strategy and clarity, and determination, and is article.hat this i do not see a happening at the moment. as an interesting party, i

would endorse what james said with as much strength as i can offer. there's a reason why the first amendment is freedom of speech in the u.s. constitution. you cannot have a democracy that works with any kind of efficiency or effectiveness if the citizens don't know very much. hope and endorse what you're saying, james. ands open up to questions comments from the panel -- i mean, from the audience. be brief. identify yourself at the start. and mostly questions, please, not speeches. but i would not mind if you point if people want to make them. -- a few points if people want to make them. >> my name is gina mckenzie. just a quick question about the and electionsia specifically. have we seen an active as asian -- and optimization of political

figures. are we seeing political candidates and political figures moving into the media? >> well, obviously, those politicians will have their own media outlets. they will cover electoral issues , which meansd way there will be more favoritism toward the media station that the candidate owns. that a lotd news is of the media outlets that are either owned by certain or are sponsoring,

they are serving the interests of the neighboring countries. carry much significance because they do not have a lot of audiences. i have heard that the recent that the most popular tv station in afghanistan has caught 60% of the audience. imagine a country where we have around 75 tv stations. around 60% has got of the audience. that is significant. and referring to the elections, i think the recent coverage of elections, ithe shows that afghanistan has not gotten very far in terms of

professionalism and setting the agenda for the debates. because it has proven that afghan media has not gotten very far in terms of professionalism. >> the gentleman up there. >> my name is mohammed mahdi for voice of america afghanistan service. one question in three parts. how much of a focus are the negatives in afghanistan? and the second part is what focuses their on journalism? and the last part, is there market for an audience test?

>> after the last experience, now the afghan media is focused [indiscernible] withortium and regard to reporting on corruption and human rights, which is, each month we produce two investigative reports, one human rights and one on corruption. we can say that some of those have a good impact. and our president, president and gave atook these

in his biweekly radio mentioned our investigative report. now we have some difficulty, but if we work together, we believe the future of investigative reporting will be better. i hope we will have a good change. >> there is a huge appetite for investigative journalism in afghanistan. unfortunately, we have not had much six -- much success in producing the content. is thate reason afghanistan has a problem with

access to information. there are huge portions of the afghan government that is information. we still don't have access to a lot. the environment for the safety of media workers is still not that good. there are still -- is still a lot of intimidation going on, particularly when cases become .ersonal then those who are covered will go after the media workers and start terrorizing and attacking. we have had examples of this in the past. the third problem has been lack of sufficient education in the area of investigative journalism . there is a huge problem of

corruption and there is a huge need for investigative journalism. >> that segues to another subject. let me ask you about this, james. it is our business in a way and also the business of mr. answer here. just state broadcasting, government broadcasting. answer's rta is moving to a bubble broadcast model and changing the way they think about -- a public broadcast model and changing the way they think about they do their work. what is the role for the bbc and other broadcasters? is there a course correction we should make? i'm thinking about this because when he talks about investigative journalism, one of the things we have put away recently with a correction correspondent, and -- corruption correspondent, and he is identifying stories he can do. in some cases, it might be dangerous for people in the service to do, or for their families.

if you see what i'm saying. that is one role that the bbc can usefully provide to the courageous afghan journalists that are on the front lines. what do you think we ought to be doing? >> first, let me just pay and to themr. anzwer partnership with rta. , theng closely with rta bbc has a major program of public debate. has a large audience, about six point 5 million people. we've just had a whole series of presidential debates that were rta,produced with rta, by and in association with us, but to bbc editorial standards. of the 11 provincial candidates took part in those.

and i think they are commanding a great deal of credibility. is potentially the most important media actor in afghanistan, and that is a very unfashionable thing to say, particularly in washington. two or three years ago i felt all of the injury was in the theercial sector, and independents, of course, was in the marshals esther. but -- commercial sector. but rta does reach across the whole country. it reaches into rural areas, outside the cities, those populations that are not reached commercialitional media. i think rta is key to the future particularlyy, becoming more independent. what we were talking about this morning that is needed in

afghanistan is a national dialogue, a national public debate. one of the foundational things for a national dialogue to come is rta. this is a difficult argument to make, actually. we support public service broadcasting around the world. and the number of success stories, a successful transition of state broadcasters to independent, financial independent broadcasters is not a good one. the political price of surrendering control of the state broadcaster i any incumbent president is very high -- by any incumbent president is very high. importance of that platform for independent public debate in fragmented, fragile states, i would argue has never been more important. with others,to

with you, to reboot, reimagine publicle debate of the service broadcasting. how can we inject a new level of energy and creativity into that discussion yak up >> anyone else on that disc -- into that discussion? >> anyone else on that discussion? ok, the german standing in front of -- yes, there. my question goes to mr. chafee and mr. coco about the increased violence against the journalists. i think it will affect the freedom of the press and freedom of expression. media partnered

with these other institutions to solve this issue? and how do you see the level of the violence against herbalists in the future, and how do you see the future government to protect the rights and safeguard journalists and their rights in the future? >> thank you. it is good to see you in washington. it is a huge challenge. violence against media workers is becoming an increasingly and it haslenge discouraged a lot of media workers. and it has -- and because of the fact that a lot of the violence is waged by people who work in the government, you know, most of them security workers, it has increased the gap between media and the government.

it has created a vicious cycle where the media fiercely criticizes the government. and the government in return, keeps adding pressure on the media. this has created a vicious cycle that has undermined the constructive role of journalism. and the only evil who take advantage of this is the parliament. because the government for the perception -- war perception and war propaganda. we have created a working group between the presenters of the media support organizations and the security organizations. we are having meetings on a regular basis. we are working to create a weking environment where

constructively resolve the problem. a lot of the things that feed it howto create guidelines on those who work for the afghan security organizations should behave toward media workers. to we have distributed this all security organizations. and we are also working with on this guideline and the training curriculum of the so that organizations they know what the role of media workers is and how we should behave with them. >> in blue, right there. >> rachel read from open

society. thank you for the discussion so far. it's been great. following on the conversation you've had about intimidation and threats against journalists, from has been a report some years ago. one of the things that i know, danish, you have been doing is working with the media to do things jointly. that a model that you see going forward? yes. in the last year in 2013, we touched some of the important afghanistan and we created that together with media

outlets, those kinds of sensitive issues and how we -- if the pressure came , forthe government is one, if it organization to another, we share that pressure from the government. it has worked. when we get something, received a strong case, we bring that case to the international media. and the international media will highlight it. media isthe afghan translated. but now we have around 17 .ndependent media outlets

these are aligned. and we share the media outlets and we cover that. when we do this, there is no pressure. i will give you one example. in theere was corruption kabul municipality regarding the had onehe kabul mayor week to criticize the media. after that one week he became quiet. i just want to add a few words on this. i think the media consortium is a great beginning here in the world of investigative

journalism in afghanistan. the problem was that previously, -- or still, if a single media outlet goes and covers a sensitive corruption case, then what happens is that the media outlet or that particular journalist comes under the radar of either the government or the warlord or anyone who has been responsible for the corruption case. doesthe media consortium is -- and at the same time, six or seven media outlets broadcast the same story. so then in that case, if it is as government or a warlord the perpetrator, or whomever, they cannot do much with six media outlets. because what they do is they come to, for example, pajhwok, and pajhwok says they got it this one and that one says

it got it from another. this is a very good way of going journalism,igative and a very good start. >> at very good. the audience we are trying to address for this conference is, of course, in afghanistan, but it is also here. what kind of stories haven't you seen, and what kinds of stories would you like to see covered by the american media in afghanistan from here on? >> i think the american public brackets afghanistan with a rack. -- with iraq. them very similarly. the news business is about bad news. we don't cover hurricanes that don't happen. we cover hurricanes that did happen. by our very nature, we are inclined to cover bad news, because that is news. that said, it is not clear to the neck and people that there is an obvious difference between iraqi and cannot stand -- between iraq and afghanistan.

in one year, about 300,000 were killed in iraq. you are 2.5 times one likely to be killed in iraq today than you are in afghanistan. toon't think that is clear the american public. and i'm not saying the 3000 is a you areber at all, but more likely to be killed in iraq and afghanistan. and you are six times more likely to be killed in new orleans. because of the gun violence in this country. but the mayor can public does not really get that. -- the american public does not really get that. there were some good questions raised by matthew rosenberg and others. and there will occasionally be a profile in the business section of the "new york times." but that is very exceptional. in a not saying that we need to promote all of the good news, but there is a little story about the teleconference at

their -- the telecom sector in afghanistan. those would be good stories. >> what i'm wondering is, going forward, will it get attention at all? is notnk if the bsa signed, we will see as much coverage in this country about afghanistan as we see today about tajikistan. that is just a fact. americans, we love to forget. the coverage of iraq more or less disappeared. it has come back because the situation is so bad. there will not be a great deal of attention if there are not american soldiers in some long-term. and by the way, why should there be? if the afghans don't want us there and we don't have people there, even though we all agree that it is desirable that we stay in some shape or form, why would the american public continue to care? that is just a simple formula to. >> rifles that we have come to

the end of our time and we -- right. we have come to the end of our time. we need to come to the next item, which is me talking. briefly, briefly. the last -- any last points you want to make? and bbcnk boa organizations are going to increasingly have important roles to play in terms of providing the external and independent coverage as well, and i think they also provide a bit of cover for the continuation of investigative journalism in afghanistan. i think that will become more important in the future rather than less important. i'm extremely grateful, by the way, for boa and for inviting me to speak at this. the final thought is what i said before. i just don't think we are taking this seriously enough. too much money and too much blood and treasure has gone into this to be wasted. this is an area of success.

it is not a narrator where a legacy is being built. we arebe secured, but not going about it in the right way and we are not going about it carefully enough. and i kind of think that not just here, but also in brussels, london, and elsewhere, a lot more attention needs to be paid to this. have one point. media is, afghan greeting the worst in the current election. have comee outlets together to monitor the election . i believe we will control that inthe thought of the current election. >> afghanistan recently had a very successful election in 2004. there was 70% turnout.

there has not been 70% turnout in the mayor can elections since 1900. it is not impossible that the election will go pretty well. >> it can't be ruled out. [laughter] >> a very good point. .ajeeb -- najib >> ladies and gentlemen, in afghanistan we have come a long way. we have 75 television stations, more than 200 radio stations, and several hundred newspapers and websites. this makes afghanistan the in thatof freedom region, which is controlled by authoritative -- authoritarian regimes. none of this would have been possible without generous and support of the international community, particularly the united states. it also signifies the fact that we cannot afford to lose this.

think you very much. >> thank you very much. thanks to our panelists. i'm just going to move over here. [applause] thanks to everyone for attending .oday's discussions i hope you found them thought-provoking and useful. i certainly did. and the world media is with us, so perhaps others outside of this room will be also. quick some of you know that i network years as a television correspondent, many of them covering the national news. and i once wrote a soviet tank from jalalabad to kabul, covering the russian troop withdrawal. i am proud of my work as a journalist, but i have to tell you that one of the bad raps on commercial television news has some truth to it. you have probably heard the cynical view of tv news that if it bleeds, it leads.

that is the nature of the business. and it is human nature. research consistently shows that people will switch channels during good news stories more readily than during stories of tragedy, bloodshed, and drama. the networks know that. so to the wires, so to the newspapers. the news business thrives on conflict, and conflict there has been in afghanistan. on a day in afghanistan if a roadside bomb killed four soldiers, depending on what else was going on, that might make the news in this country. but on that same day if five new schools or a maternal health clinic was opened, you almost certainly would not hear about that over here. one network correspondent, a friend of mine who used to come to kabul every few months when i was working at the embassy he would do stories about the american troops and what they were up to. business, wehe call those bang bang stories.

because they always had an explosion in them somewhere. and my friend told me that he knew the international forces were only there -- the purpose of the forces there was to open up space for aid workers, ngos, investors, and most of all afghans to rebuild their country, their shattered economy, and to build some hope for the generation that is coming forward in afghanistan. what theyood that was thatthere for, but he said story is not sexy. but as noted in the previous enrollmentary school saw a sevenfold increase in eight years. the proportion of gold -- of girls went from virtually zero in school to now close to 40%. while i was serving at the embassy in kabul, i helped to arrange, and i'm terribly proud of this am a -- and i'm terribly

proud of this, i hope to fund a launch of the afghan version of sesame street. children with reading and counting. we produced our program, and it is still being produced in close consultation with the afghan ministry of education. there are some very clever people in that ministry who made a very strong program. the project helps to educate afghans from preschool stage and onward, and frankly, all the way up to adulthood in some cases. that program creates hope and it represents real change that matters. have not heard about it much in the american media, because stories of american gis and to live on suicide bombers are more compelling television. they are. it is not that american audiences and readers have been told anything that is not true about afghanistan. there has been plenty of tragedy in afghanistan. there is plenty of corruption, as we discussed. and there are many opportunities that are squandered. all legitimate news stories.

and they have been written about. but in my view, at least, the american public has not heard the other half of the story in a fully balanced way. , i'm not me wrong saying that the pessimism about afghanistan's future post 2014 is misplaced. there are many reasons for deep concern. it is a rough neighborhood, as we have discussed. some of the neighbors are seeking to keep afghanistan week for their own purposes. for their own purposes. and it's always had its own divisions, tribal and regional and so forth. yes, there is going to be trouble ahead of course. and no doubt about it. but the conventional wisdom seems to hold that afghanistan is set now to revert to the bad old days. i think it is incumbent on the people in the room here, and those of us who have spoken at

the panel, and everyone else who is listening to try to prove the conventional wisdom wrong. personally, i believe in the younger generation of afghans, the young afghans that i met in kabul, kandahar, lazar, and herat. many of them highly motivated and very impressive. of course, they will need to be. in any case, we americans may be policymakerst our do know that afghanistan will continue to matter for geostrategic regions -- reasons, both to the united states and to the west. and there is no getting around that. it is just a fact. speaking for the voice of america, i can tell you that we plan to keep a robust presence on the air in dari and pashto, on radio and on television, with our fine party -- partner at rta, and perhaps others.

while the shape of our efforts may change a little bit, we and aresister organization looking to maintain an important role in serving our audiences in afghanistan. i guess, what i would like to close by saying is that whatever happens in terms of the , aidary, the political budget, investment, and so forth, i hope that one message to afghans going forward comes from this conference. and it is simply this, you have friends here. us who put time ,nto helping out in the past and we have a special place in our hearts for your country. thank you very much. [applause]

[captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] sex and some news from the associated press. a meeting at the white house earlier today -- >> some news from the associated press. a meeting at the white house earlier today over news that russia decided to send the military into ukraine. no official word yet from the , where the security council began a closed-door meeting just about two hours ago to talk about the situation in the ukraine. we will continue to bring you updates on the c-span networks. turning now to capitol hill, both chambers are back in on monday. one of the items this week in a house includes a bill that would eliminate the health care law's individual mandate tax policy for those who do not buy health insurance by the end of this year. we talked about the week ahead

for congress with a journalist who covers capitol hill. >> adrian bettelheim is the senior editor of cq roll call. joining us now with a look at the week ahead in congress. congress comes back next week with the 2015 budget. what are some of the key issues we should be looking for in the president's budget and what is the expected reaction by congressional leaders? >> first of all, the budget will be released in two installments. the first will come out tuesday. most of the detail will be coming out the week later, which makes it harder to do apples to apples, year-to-year comparisons. said theistration delay is due to the delay in the budget agreement in december and the subsequent spending bills for fiscal year 2014. it will at least give us a a sense of where their priorities are on tuesday. basically, because the two-year budget agreement put in place topline spending numbers, this coming budget season is going to be more a forum to showcase

competing fiscal visions in the campaign year. i think the republicans are planning to roll out their own budget and offer general goals on taxes, trade, energy and regulatory curbs. democrats will be pointing out the upbeat economic outlook after all of these fiscal showdowns we've been having in washington. >> we know congressional hearings on the budget also begin next week, including one wednesday with the new senate finance committee chairman ron wyden. what do you expect to hear from him on the budget and what you think will happen in those hearings? >> talking about reading room for more priorities with the economy improving. wyden is new to this tax-writing panel, and he has his own ideas on tax policy. forn, it is kind of a forum ideas about the broader economy. you won't be seeing senate democrats doing their own budget

land for fiscal year 2015, because they feel the december agreement already kind of put the spending caps in place. meanwhile, the house republicans will do their plan, and i will be pitted against the ministrations blueprints. that is the opening salvo, shall we say. >> republicans met this last week and talked about alternatives to the house -- the health care law. there is a bill scheduled for the house floor on the laws individual mandate. what about that bill and what is the current republican strategy on health care? >> they obviously still object to obamacare. i think they have moved away from just trying to repeal it, and they are after individual pieces. his measure that is coming up next week has the same effect the bill the house passed last year. the gop argument is that the it ministration is giving businesses with relief from the overhaul and it cause them to delay for a year the penalty on most individuals who do not buy

health coverage. the democrats last time this came up, it attracted almost two dozen democratic votes. it will be interesting to see if most of them vote along with it. nancy pelosi blasted the bill to my saying it would drive up premiums if it were to become law. obviously, it will not become law, because it is a symbolic vote and it will be an interesting bit of theater. >> there's a flood insurance bill that was postponed this last week. and then some energy related legislation. anything they're going -- anything going on there you can tell us about? deal, itood insurance was supposed to come up wednesday and then thursday and then was put off until this week. her public and leaders are working with democrats on this one. they are trying to come up with a draft that the house can swiftly pass and a cynic and clear. they are trying to mitigate some heavy premium increases to property owners in flood areas that came about because of legislation that the congress

passed last year to address the chronic deficits in the national flood insurance program. they are sort of undoing their work to provide some relief. on the energy bill, the house is going to be taking up among other things a measure that would restrict the epa's restriction of carbon emissions by coal powered power plants. this is a big change in utilities. it would require any epa carbon solution limits to be based on existing technology. it is going to be a theme this week. there'll be several energy bills, just like there was a theme this last week about .xcessive regulation >> atrial bettelheim with cq roll call, we think you for your look ahead. as always, sir, thanks for your time. >> my pleasure. thanks.

told both ase students and as a nation in terms of popular imagination is that there are all kinds of citizens and marches and demonstrations that occur. but they are really done by these famous, iconic people. basically, rosa parks, who was just so tired that she refused to get up from the bus in montgomery, alabama, and sparked a bus boycott, and basically, a young preacher, who even the president referred to during the election as this young preacher from georgia, which is dr. martin luther king, junior, who would lead masses of african-americans from racial oppression. if martin to do this stuff and just he could run and barack could fly, all of bute things sound good, they really simple five much more comp located history. and that comp located history really involves so many african-americans, women and

men, who proactively dismantled racial segregation, including rosa parks. rosa parks was active. she did not just refuse to give up her seat by accident. it was a concerted, strategic effort to try to get -- try to reform democratic institutions. of "dark days, bright black" in what he called power studies. his latest will be in bookstores march 4. sunday, he will take your questions in depth live for three hours starting at noon eastern on c-span's book tv. >> beat down, thrown out, and broke. year in, year out.

they are stuck, choked to death on the barren land. their homes were nightmares of sweat and dust, night and day. many stayed until machinery, homes, credit, food, and even hope were gone. quick this weekend on america history -- american history's tv railamerica, the documentary "the plow that broke the plains," the history of the great plains region. sunday at 4:00 p.m. on c-span3. next, homeland security secretary jeh johnson. he appeared before the homeland security committee talking about his department agenda. this is the secretaries first appearance -- this is the secretaries first appearance and he was confirmed in december.

the hearing it's a little less than two hours. committee on homeland security will come to order. the committee is meeting today to hear testimony from secretary jeh johnson on his vision and priorities for the department of homeland security. the committee has -- is under several time constraints is my, including limited availability of the secretary, & -- and scheduling commitments members may have. for this reason, the chair will strictly enforce a five minute rule for questioning witnesses. should members have additional questions for the witness, they will be able to ask -- if they are questions they cannot ask during her five minutes, they will submit questions. the chair appreciates members cooperation for moving the hearing along in an efficient manner. the secretary will be testifying before the committee again in march with the release of the fiscal year 2015 budget. i now recognize myself or an opening statement.

>> today is the anniversary of the bombing of the world trade center. it is fitting that he is here to discuss his position for dhs. sir, your position is among the most important for the federal government. you are at the helm of the department. yourreciate sincerely outreach to me over the past few months to discuss our shared concerns about issues of national security. solving these to challenges and look forward to working constructively with you in the future.

i just met with the new york city police commissioner and others to discuss threat. al qaeda affiliates continue to target the united states. iran's proxies are present throughout the hemisphere. and a growing number of places cross africa provide safe havens for jihadist network. with a growing concern for lone wolf attacks, we have to accept the reality that threaten not diminishing, but evolving. the agency has to mitigate threats to the homeland, whether by jihadist, networks abroad, or from individual radicals from within our borders. the events in syria are now threatening to become issues for us at home. said in youryou speech at the wilson center that syria has become a matter of

homeland security. i agree. and i want to hear what the department is doing to counter the threat to the homeland. in addition, the capture over this last weekend of the top win lord, guzman, is a huge for the united states and for mexico. he is responsible for thousands of deaths and his reach went far beyond mexico. his public enemy number one in he is public enemy number one in chicago, and carries indictments in several states. his arrest was significant both symbolically and operationally come and i applaud the ice agents for their participation along with the dea, u.s. marshals, and mexican -- histies for this capture. i want him to face justice in the united states and make sure he is never out on the street again.

the threats go far beyond the borders of the united states. porous borders cause threats to our security and our borders have been haphazardly security since 9/11. department has been required to create a national strategic plan for the border. i'm hopeful that with your experience, you will be best able to organize your staff and strategist and planners at the national strategic level. i'm also hopeful that the department will work with this committee on improving our cyber defenses, which i know you have vast experience in. the department of homeland security has a critical role to play in the national security and cyber security infrastructure act in 2013, which unanimously passed out of our committee earlier this month

. it takes an important step by codifying the department cyber security mission. the committee would like to see a greater emphasis on building an experienced and streamlined cyber workforce and increasing the security and resiliency of our federal networks.