tribune newspapers and fawn johnson, a correspondent with "national journal." >> let's start with the minimum wage increase. this is a big deal for the democrats. expected to be a big deal in the campaign. right from the beginning, you have drawn a hard-line, thank you do not want to negotiate the rate that you have proposed over three years, $10.10 per hour. can you tell us why? >> it is not just a big deal for democrats. it is a big deal for millions of people. 80% of the people we are talking about that will get a raise our adults. 54% are parents of kids. over half of them bring at least half the family income.

we are not just talking about teenagers getting new jobs, by the way. we estimate about 20 million people get a raise in america. it is a progrowth bill. the economic benefits will increase the gdp. this is a progrowth bill. he asked about why i say $10.10. we looked historically out what we had done in raising the minimum wage back to 1939. the average of all of the years is about a 41% increase. some are higher and some are lower. the average 41%. our rates would be 39%. it is keeping historically with what we have done. the last minimum wage increase

that happened under the bush administration was 42% increase. over three years. the largest was 39% over three years. how do we pick $10.10? i have a chart here that shows about how much the minimum wage has declined in terms of the level of poverty. as you can see, in 1968, it was 100% of the poverty line. today it is almost 20% below. at $10.10 it would get up to 107% of the poverty line. it is just above the line of poverty and then we index it. from now on, we want to change what is happening in america with low-wage workers. no longer in the future will you work full-time on a job and still fall below the poverty line.

we will get you above the poverty line and then we index it to keep you above. >> i think that makes a lot of sense. the president himself by one point endorsed a lower minimum wage increased to nine dollars an hour. some states are looking at the same thing. do you have universal support within your own party to go all the way up to $10.10 so that you

can put it on the floor and vote for it? >> i do not know that anything has universal support around this town anymore. within our party, we have near universal support for this. i have found the more that i have outlined why $10.10, some say it was too much of an increase. when i showed what the last increases were, it is in keeping. about the same. we do it over three years. it just gets you above the poverty line. anything less than that locks in, especially if we want to index it, for ever. when people think about it they say we do not want to do that. want to get people above the poverty line. >> near universal support is so hard in the senate. even within your own caucus, it is not enough to get something going. we know there opposition from the republicans to the minimum wage. what can you do now to get more support within your party and to get this dealt to the floor? otherwise it seems there's bit of a delay bring it to the floor and maybe it is not quite happening. >> i do not understand why the republicans are so against increasing the minimum wage? all of the studies show it is a progrowth policy. it will increase our gdp, a raise in net income. people will have more money to spend. low-wage workers tend to spend every extra dollar they get and they spent it locally. if they are not going to france or england or japan. they are not buying yachts and

stuff. they aren't spending it at local merchants. it has a great multiplier effect. >> are there any other concessions you ain't you or the supporters could make to draw in your own party? >> we are to have. we have already adjusted as. the first phase-in was going to happen in three months. we double that. we said six months. we also put in an extension of expensing for capital equipment for certain small businesses, which expires last year. we put that in there to help small businesses that have to buy new equipment. then they do not have to write it off. these are some good benefits.

>> when do you expect a vote? >> leader harry reid wants to bring it up after the next break. we have a break coming up the third week in march. after that we will be on the minimum wage. >> why the delay? >> next week we have another bill out in my committee, a block grant. that will take some time. then the leader i think wanted to come back on the unemployment insurance extension. that takes us up to the break. >> you said it is a progrowth bill. republican side job loss and they look at the congressional budget office and say the report found it could cost $6 billion for 2016. >> that is a horrible misreading. the cbo report to basically

agrees with everything that we have been saying on our minimum wage bill. it has been an increase in net income to lift people out of poverty. they said about 25 million people would get a raise. we estimated 28 million people. they looked at studies on job loss. here's the kicker. what they said was that given these dynamics, the job loss could be anywhere from zero per million so we will pick 500,000. if you look are there at the data in the cbo report, there is a chance they would be a million job losses and a one in six chance there will be no job loss and actually more jobs. i am just saying. they took this. it could be 100 jobs.

it could be 1000 jobs. we could gain some jobs. we will have a hearing like this in a couple of weeks. this will come out. they picked one thing like that to say we cannot do this. there may be some minor job loss. again, compared to 20 million people getting a raise, 14 million kids live in families that would get a raise. think about what that means to families over america. >> we wanted to ask you about the affordable care act. we were wondering, as the midterm election approaches in november, should the democrats run on obamacare?

>> absolutely. >> tell us why. >> i am not running for reelection. i just think politically eying courage the republicans to run against obamacare. look. we have 4 million people signed up now. these are 4 million people that do not have health insurance before or they had no coverage basically. that is incredible. also we have another 31 days to go. we may pick up another million or two. who knows? a lot of people will wait till the last minute until they sign up. i was acting chair of the committee at the time it was passed. what happens, we said it would estimated it will be at 7 million.

this will be five or six. we will be close to our original estimates. then one of the major changes i made, i have been talking about this almost all of my adult lifetime, to change our system. in america we have a sick-care system. if you are sick you will get care. we have very little to encourage you to be healthy and stay healthy and prevent illness. in the affordable care act, every plan out there has within it that you can get free preventative services. you can go for checkups, wellness checkups, preventative care, no co-pays, no deductibles. we already have that put in. we started with medicare a year ago. millions of seniors on medicare going in to get their health check up. maybe they need to change their diet or do something else to stay healthy. they're finding this out.

they are taking action. that is a huge change in the dynamics and health care. republicans want to run against that. they want to get rid of that. be my guest. i think democrats should run on obamacare, point out all of the benefits. to the health care coverage that people never had before. >> one of the things that i was curious about was how you feel about the republicans dogging obamacare and if they expect it to be a huge issue when they are running for office. i also wondered if you think that the democrats and the supporters of the affordable care act have done a good enough job explaining the law and where you would like to see the explanations improve. there is a lot of

misunderstanding and anger about the law. >> look. anytime you change a huge system like health care in america, there's bound to be some problems. need i mention the computer glitches? we worked through that. it is a change in dynamics. there is some complexity to it. we are trying to resolve problems for 300 million americans, families. there is going to be some complexity to it. it takes a little time to figure it out and get everything in place. i said this what we passed the bill. think of this as a starter home. the framework is there. now we may have to add a room here, redesign something here. that is what we're going to do.

the affordable care act is not the 10 commandments written in stone for all eternity. it is a starter home, a structure. we may have to modify it a little here. the structure is sound. everybody in america will now have health insurance. they will have preventative care free. they will not have to worry about their wellness checkups and things like that. this is profound change. if republicans want to run against it, i say be my guest. go ahead. you will find by the time the election rolls around, the american people will say "we do not want to go back to the old system." >> could you maybe give us a letter grade, some sort of assessment, of how well the president and your party have done at explaining health care to the american people? >> look.

we have had some problems. i will be the first to admit it. i was involved in developing this legislation. we have had some problems. there has been a bottom is information that has gone out. that has confused everything. we have had from day one a constant barrage of misinformation from my friends on the republican side and from the pundits out there on this. it is hard to get the truth. there is the old song "a lie gets around the world three times." that is true here, too. a letter grade? i do not know. we have made some mistakes reassure we have. maybe some things we should have done a little differently. these are the kind of mistakes you make when you are making big changes in something as personal to people as their health care insurance. we have had some problems. through it all, i think we are in a good place now to really move ahead in with obamacare.

it is hard to greater so. right? >> fair enough. can you tell us what is happening in iowa with the medicaid expansion? what do you think will be the outcome there? >> i do not know. i'm sorry the governor did not just accept medicaid expansion. that would have been the best. that would have been understandable. the governor had a different design on medicaid expansion. some of it i am not objected to. it has to do with wellness. i feel very strongly about wellness and prevention. giving people who are on medicaid to take better care of themselves and get their checkups and be involved in preventative health care.

there are some of that that is pretty good. it is moving along in iowa. hopefully, over the next course of the next year or two, i am hopeful people who are on medicaid will have full access. it would have been simpler to go to the federal system. the state of iowa still could have added the provisions on wellness to that. the governor saw differently. i think every state that accepted the federal provisions on medicaid are doing much better than the states that did not. >> we have about 10 minutes left. i wanted to ask you about the two check service. it is for the acts that will make it a little easier for women to bring lawsuits. you have said you will mark it up and your committee sometime in these ring. senator reid has agreed to put it on the floor. it has passed the house under

democratic control. it did not pass in the senate during the last congress. what is the point of bringing it up again now? >> the point of bringing it up is because it is the right thing to do. you try to do what is in the best interest of the public. that is what we are trying to do. i'm going to do that. we passed the fair pay act in 1961. that has been in the law but the penalties surrounding that have been so lax that people are getting by with discriminating. this updates it and provides for stiffer penalties for violation of the fair pay act. i am going to bring it up. we're going to bring it out on the floor.

hopefully, we will have enough votes to pass it. again, i hope that we will have enough republicans that will help us past the. already i do not know any republicans now that want to make more women mad at them? >> i guess that is really the point. knowing that the debate might not have shifted since the last time it was on the senate for, is this just an effort to again maybe point of any disparities that happened? >> i have been here for 40 years. i always think it is fair for a party in power or the minority party to make sure they can bring up legislation that shows people the difference in the

parties. which party are you going to be on their side? for women, the democratic party wants to make sure the fair pay act is enforced. republicans do not. who is on my side? minimum wage. we bring it up because people want to know. they ought to have the knowledge so they know what they are voting for. there's nothing wrong with that. >> on the labor front, we thought this very close election down in tennessee with the united auto workers trying to unionize the volkswagen plant. it is very important to the uaw as they try to reach into the southern states where there are these automotive facilities. they lost a very narrow election.

what does that mean for the future not only of the uaw but for organized labor in general? we have seen a steady decline of labor union participation over the years. what is the state of labor? how do you assess this loss? >> what was dismaying about the vote was the amount of money that was poured in knots from the union or the company volkswagen bug from outside sources. the koch brothers were putting money in there. plus there were, i must say this very dismaying statements made by public officials that simply were not true. >> senator corker? >> one said he had it from the company that if they voted not to have the union they would

start another line at the company. later on the company came back and said no. we do not make that statement at all. the damage was done by public official. people in tennessee are saying that members of the state legislature, if this passes we will not give them any tax benefits in the future. they will not be able to expand. here was a company, volkswagen, that do not care. they do not take a side. volkswagen in germany is fully unionize. they pay their workers well. quite frankly, they make a pretty good product. here they come to america and it was not a company that defeated the union. they were fine with the union.

it was outside forces. that is what is dismaying. it is something new that has not really happened before. the uaw has taught a complaint with the relations board. we have a full board for the first time there in a long time. i do not know what the outcome will be. i know they have filed an appeal. >> that says, how do you think labor should fight against these forces if it hopes to remain relevant? >> i do not know what the nlrb is going to find. it seems to me the people that voted no, i'm wondering if they're having second thoughts because they may have taken to heart, and made by public officials that simply were not true. maybe there needs to be a re-vote on this.

>> not to ignore the last element and bailiwick, i wanted to ask you. i have spent a lot of time with the tea party for other stories in the last couple of months. they say arne duncan is one of the most powerful in history because of the inaction of congress to reauthorize the no child left behind act. do you agree with that statement? what do you think can be done to unstick the stuck education laws? >> i cannot believe there's something i agree with the tea party on. arnie duncan is powerful. he should be.

congress cannot do anything. we all agree we should get over it. we cannot get anything done. then we have the higher education act. i will try to bring up the elementary and secondary education act. we know the republicans will not be there to vote for it. when congress advocates its responsibility, then the secretary has to take over into things. nobody wanted to keep no child left behind going with the terrible provisions. secretary duncan is coming with the waivers to allow schools to get out from underneath that if they will do certain things. a lot of the things are basic that we have in our legislation. the republicans will not let us pass it. i think duncan is doing a great job. he is doing a great job.

we need to pass the legislation. they house is to pass them. we need to go to conference and work these things out. this year i do not know if we can get it done. >> we will have to leave it on that note. thank you for being here. we're back here with our reporters. let's begin with the minimum wage. when is this likely to come to the floor, if at all? >> we do not hear a whole lot of new information on minimum wage. it sounds like the prospects are not good at this point. senator harkin said after this work period that it will bump it into another month. if there do not seem to be any movement from the main sticking point, this $10.10 rate on

democrats. they do not seem interested in compromise. >> there have been some democratic senators, mark warner said we should do a minimum wage but there's some debate about timing and the amount. it sounds like some democrats would be open to a little bit of a lower rate. >> i think that is true. the thing i would add to what mr. harkin was saying is that i do not see a lot of room for republicans to be copper might think on the other side. senator harkin told me his $10.10 limit in january and i called around trying to find people who would talk to me about what they wanted. none of them had any idea about some sort of coming together.

to some extent, it makes sense to hear him using that threshold. it is not clear to me even if they were to get the democrats together that there would be anybody in the republican party who would even go close to it. >> is this now and election year issue for the democrats? >> that is a good question. it is an election year. it is important for the parties to show what they would put out as their priorities, even if they cannot get support. i think maybe the jury is out on that. the american people get frustrated seeing congress not doing anything. that was what his approach was. we have seen democrats want to use this as an issue. >> another big election issue is the health care law. what did you hear from the chairman? >> he loves obamacare. he was able to go out and tout

its good things. it is interesting to hear that. republicans think they can win based on this. i wanted to ask him whether or not the republicans were hurting themselves by just focusing on it. he answered right away, absolutely. it is nice to see somebody who actually put it together talk about how he likes it. >> do they have the numbers to go out there for obama care? >> we have seen democrats taken a mixture road. some are leaning into it more than others. the senator is confident the

numbers will continue to increase. he was willing to acknowledge shortcomings both in having created the law and the rollout. he was honest about the problems he saw in the rollout. he is also retiring after a very long career in the senate, which he acknowledged. it may be easier for him to say "run on it" than those in more conservative states. >> it is nice to see one of the chief sponsors of the bill come out and say this is a wonderful thing and i am glad to see all of the good news that come from it. at the same time, he is so far away from some conservative democrats who are trying to win out the voters.

it may make more sense to have somebody talk about the good things in obamacare like the preventative care that he was referencing. maybe they do not have to talk about how it is the best thing that happened in the last 10 years. >> we will see how it shapes up. thank you both. i appreciate it. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] >> public affairs of men from washington directly to you, putting you in the room for white house events, briefings and conferences, and offering coverage of the u.s. house all at the private industry. we were created by the cable tv industry and funded by your local cable or satellite provider. watch us in hd.

follow us on twitter. houset, the chair of the ways and means committee unveiling his plans for overhauling the u.s. tax code. this is 20 minutes. >> there have been some any changes to the tax code over the past decade. ite than one every day that is now 10 times the size of the bible with none of the good news. i know this seems like an old joke but when i travel around michigan it still gets a pretty good joke. taxpayers and job creators talk about how we need to simplify and fix our broken outdated tax code. but what isn't funny is the impact that washington's tinkering has had. too long have to look before we see with the current

tax code has done to jobs and take home pay. lakers have been steadily falling. this week economy cannot even produce enough jobs for all the kids coming out of college today. there are a record number of moving back in with their parents. the last time we heard from and tax it was 19 86. the america was a beacon for investment hiring and small wages. it is now falling behind. it risks falling even further behind. the time to act as now. america cannot afford to wait. i really saw what a mess washington was making back in december 2010 when just a few of basisld huddle on a daily to figure how we would handle aspiring tax revisions.

not when the real world makes business decisions on a long-term basis. after that, i sent the committee to focus on comprehensive tax return -- reform. we held over 30 hearings. sandy levin and i formed 11 bipartisan working groups. reform.govnched tax on the need for suggestions in how to do tax reform. have done to say we this in the most open, transparent, and bipartisan basis. the democrats asked to see the bill to start analyzing. that is what i am here to kick off today. decade.artie lost a

enact a real, meaningful tax reform to get this economy back on track. a simpler,releasing fairer tax code. more importantly, what i can mean for job creators. code,t comes to the tax everyone should play by the same rules. should be determined by what is fair. not what you know in washington. three-point plan to fix our broken tax code. first, we need to make our tax code simpler and error. could byn the tax collapsing the seven brackets for virtually all taxable .

that means 95% of the country no longer has to itemize. no more keeping track of all those receipts. second, we make the tax code more effective and efficient by getting rid of special interest handouts. this will allow small and large businesses alike to expand operations and increase benefits and take home pay. is, people want a simpler, fairer, flatter tax

code. when we asked the american people, more than 80% said that the complexity of the tax code hurts the economy. by a two to one margin, they support making changes. even some of the most sensitive policies like the home mortgage reduction and charitable contributions. what they really want and what this plan delivers is a stronger economy. they want to feel like they have security in knowing they, their children and their children's children will be able to reach for and achieve the american dream. after streamlining the tax code, the independent analysts say this plan could increase the size of our economy by $3.4 trillion. based on the stronger economic growth, we will see nearly 2 million new jobs created. there will be up to a $700 billion in additional federal revenues that can be used to lower taxes even further or reduce the debt.

what is the impact of that kind of growth on middle-class families? because we will have a healthier economy, wages will start to go back up. middle-class families will have an extra $1300 in their pocket at the end of the year. that comes from a combination of lower taxes and higher wages. third, we make the tax code more accountable to hard-working taxpayers. no more hidden provisions that only benefit a favored few. nomar tax increases to bailout washington from its debt and deficit problems. if we are going to close a loophole, the american people should get the benefit of a lower rate instead of just handing them money over to washington so he can spend more. we close a lot of loopholes, we got a lot of the junk out of the code. our plan reveals 228 sections of the tax code. we cut the size of the income tax code by roughly 25%.

tax reform needs to be about strengthening the economy, making the codes blur and fairer. today we had the opportunity to make the first step forward. this is the kind of tax code the american people need and deserve. before he opened us up to questions, i want to draw your attention to a list of the major provisions in the press release. when you are talking about the entire tax code, there is a lot to go over. i want to highlight a few items on the list in addition to lowering rates, this includes simpler improved taxation of investment income. we tax long-term capital gains and dividends as normal income but exempt 40% of such income from tax, resulting in a six percentage point decrease from the maximum rate individuals pay today. it also achieves the lowest level of double taxation on investment income in modern history. we completely repeal the alternative minimum tax both

that the individual and corporate levels. this is something that congressman richie neal has made his life's work. easier education benefits, we adopt recommendations coming from the bipartisan education groups led by congressman diane black to consolidate education tax benefits. along with the additional money from stronger economic growth, families can more easily afford the cost of a college education. the more affordable care -- while the plan generally leaves obamacare policies untouched and for a later debate on health care, there are two main exceptions. one, a repeal of the medical device tax. second, a repeal of the medicine cabinet tax which prohibits the use of funds from tax-free accounts to purchase over the counter medicines without

obtaining a prescription. infrastructure investment, the plan dedicates $126.5 billion to the highway trust fund. simplification for seniors, the plan adopts a proposal supported by aarp and atr that requires the irs to develop a simple return to the known as form 1040sr for individuals over the age of 65 who received common kinds of retirement income like annuity and social security payments.

charitable giving, the plan expands opportunities to make tax-deductible contributions past the end of the year. it makes permanent incentives, simplifies exempt organization taxes and sets a floor instead of a cap to the amount of donations that can be deducted. the economic growth in this plan will increase charitable giving by $2.2 billion annually. i am sure you have a lot of questions. i am happy to take a few of those now. later, we will post a more detailed background walk-through of the plan for members of the media. that will be a 4:00 p.m. this afternoon. thank you. >> mr. chairman, yesterday senate minority leader mitch mcconnell said he saw no chance for passing tax legislation this year. this morning, the speaker wouldn't promise a vote.

when asked for details, i believe he said "blah blah blah." do you feel you are being undercut? >> i don't think we can afford to wait. i am not going to settle for an economy that grows at 2%. i am not going to settle for high unemployment, kids living at their parents and not getting out on the run. i am not going to settle for declining wages for the middle class. we need to be the party of growth, opportunity, restoring the american dream. this is something americans have hungered for. we have an obligation to debate the big issues of the day. i put out this draft so we can engage the american people on this. i think this is something that as i have traveled the country, this is something that people very much want to see move forward.

>> mr. chairman, this seems to be one of these intractable things. since 1986 we haven't made major changes. isn't the tax code kind of right where everybody wants it? democrats and republicans want to change tax policy. you want to eliminate loopholes. they have already started to do so in the last 48 hours. >> there have been times since 1986 when our economy was strong. that is not the case now. we have an obligation to find ways to get economic growth, hope for families, opportunities for families. for the first time ever, we have a tax bill that will be scored in what we call a dynamic way. that is why i was able to give you those figures in terms of 20% added to gdp, almost 2 million jobs, higher wages, more charitable giving.

these are the kinds of things that i think people want to see. investment in infrastructure. the other point that i have to make is since 1986, other nations have been changing their tax policies. there is a reason some of our american companies have moved to places like ireland. canada has dramatically reformed their tax code. mexico is beginning to do the same thing. if we don't act, we fall further behind the rest of the world. in the 1980's, we had the lowest corporate tax rate in the world. today we have the highest. in order to build this country back -- i want to see a strong america. i want to see us have the strongest growing economy in the world. tax reform is one way to do that. there are other issues that also help move us forward. tax reform is a big one that moves us in a positive direction according to the nonpartisan reveries that analyze our tax bills.

>> the second part of my question is about folks who want to protect things the way it is. you say if we're going to compete with other nations we have to get with it. [indiscernible] >> we need to have this debate. we need to move the country forward. that is why this is a discussion draft. so we can begin to engage the american people and small business owners and families on how best we can move this country forward. >> when you were asked in november by the leadership to come up with a democratic partner to come to this podium with, why did that not happen? you have a partner in the white house who said they favor a corporate tax plan. why don't you take them up on that offer and began negotiating? >> one of the reasons -- first of all, there is a corporate plan in this discussion. i think it will help modernize our tax system in a business sense. i think that the problem with just to incorporate only is you

don't get as much economic impact. first of all, more than half of businesses are organized as individuals. if you do corporate only plans, what happens to those small businesses that file as individuals? i think it is important to move forward on what i would call a comprehensive plan that involves both individuals, small businesses and corporations. not all corporations are large but many of them are. many of them do business internationally. that is a different part of the economy. it is important. a lot of these proposals that i have mentioned have both republican and democrat support. i think you will see as we move forward, you will see the fact that there is a strong dynamic score here, a lot of interest in getting this economy back on track. >> is the credit union tax

exemption preserved? >> that portion is not going to be addressed in this bill. >> is that one of the loopholes in the code? >> i think we do need to reform the law with regard to carried interest. particularly when the activity is more like wage income. we take a commonsense approach to where the activity is more like wages it will be reported and taxed as income. i think that is an appropriate reform. >> what about advertising taxes? >> one of the things we are doing in this legislation -- and there is going to be a detailed briefing on this policy -- but i would say for all businesses, the top rate is going to be 25%. there is a significant rate

reduction. one of the things we need to engage people on is the trade-offs we are making in order to lower rates. with regard to advertising, the first $1 million of advertising will be expensed as is now. i think that the 25% rate and the growth that comes from that -- that change means that our economy grows by 20%. >> [indiscernible] >> many businesses organized this way because of tax reasons. nothing would prevent them from organizing as a c corporation if they wanted to. i think it is important to the revenue-neutral in this bill.

we are in a static basis. we are also distribution only neutral. this is about how to move forward with the fairest plan possible. >> the tax on large banks and insurers, can you provide an industry-neutral -- >> as we look at the financial side of this bill, we need to look at the fact that the top rate that corporations will pay is 25%. that is a 30% reduction from the rate they pay now. in order to be able to be revenue-neutral, there are going to be certain trade-offs. one of the things we're going to be able to do is have a public discussion about the trade-offs that have been made in this legislation.

>> can you list those trade-offs? >> there is going to be a detailed briefing. i think i already answered that question. >> could you talk about the decision to do this 35% bracket? i know you wanted to get the top rate down to 25%. what happens next when you take this to the committee? >> let me answer the second part first. the committee has a bipartisan meeting tomorrow where the joint committee on taxation will walk through the details. the treasury has also agreed to send staff to that.

we will be coordinating with them. secretary lew has agreed to provide support on this. as i said, this plan is distribution only neutral. there is not going to be a tax cut at the top and. with the changes surrounding the fiscal cliff, there was a significant change in the baseline at the top end. this bill simply continues that change that was made in the last year. thank you very much. >> followed by the wall street journal's health care policy reporter. she will talk about the impact of the health care law on small businesses that offer insurance to employees. then the brookings institution discusses efforts by the obama administration to create manufacturing hubs around the industry. washington journal, live every morning at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span.

>> next, a look at u.s. intelligence capabilities and challenges from an event hosted by the world affairs in connecticut. the speaker is a former white house official. this is a little more than one hour. >> this is the standard list you do of the congressman's of a man. go really fast but that is not how i want to introduce arthur. he was a white house fellow. he had the experience of working with the national security .ouncil and henry kissinger a few minor thoughts like that.

he had three major positions in the senate, including being the administrative assistant chief of staff, the international policy advisor to chris dodd there are few companies he did not touch. you remember? i'm sorry. i forgot. he had such power that he moved the headquarters to greenwich. it is quite amazing. he actually was the assistant dean at the school of law and policy and director of

communications for the number in position and place america. and most recently as the communications director. the 16th satellites that guide our navigation systems in the united states. it is quite remarkable. they had 16,000 employees to do that. i think they were doing something else. what do you think? now he is the role of being the chairman of the public utilities regulatory -- what is the last word? authority. that is not how i want to introduce. arthur has a lot of skills outside of all of this incredibly serious and important

and incredibly intelligent view of the world. annotations.lous i will ask you to do one. he has an incredible knowledge of languages. talk to people from africa. me on the talk. it was on doing business in africa which i did this -- did a lot of time and. he did in the congo. it used to be called zaire. the africans came up to me and said, you got it right. he would say, where you from? hey would say i'm from -- he would start speaking some native tongue of the tribe. and then somebody would come and he would speak the native tongue. only about eight words.

how does this guy know our language anyway? [applause] >> thank you. of all theinly say introductions i have received in life that yours was the most recent. i understand that you are now the chairman in the world affairs council. we all remember from our last and that comes from two latin words and emeritus meanings deserves to be. but thank you.

i will forgo your offer to do imitations here. maybe one. i also want to thank megan for having me here today. you mentioned that wonderful evening that you put on for him. i spoke for him in an event. he said that was a great event. he said i have kept a video that you made of me because it has so many of my friends on it. he remembers fondly his time here. my for security clearance. i was a youngster in the white house. it was decided that i would write some correspondence, intelligence packages that went from kissinger to the president. i was the last check. common sense is that everything

here isn't written right and so forth. i do have all kinds of security clearance. me in the who cleared cold war days, when it was all over, he was a southern guy. he said, look. watch after yourself and don't do anything stupid. dana had a white house operates. they know why you are here and what your job is. there is a good chance someone will try to compromise you. don't do anything dumb. i said, could you give me a little bit of guidance? what should i expect? hands,back, folded his looked at me, and said half. i've had a long career in counter intelligence. he said, i have given this briefing 100 times during my never given itve

bitch asry son of a ugly as you are. if ever there is a woman interested in you and in intelligence, you know damn well you are being compromised. made him, i've been waiting three decades for some alluring woman to be interested in what i do intelligence. and i thank you for inviting me here. you had no idea the deep need that this has the filled. there are lots friends here today. some of you go back to when i was a toddler. some i have worked with when i was a white house fellow. others i have known for many different incarnations. thank you all for coming. of course to our distinguished peter kelly who , law,d many careers

politics, community leadership, patient of the arts, we do have our attorney general. thank you for coming, attorney not everyone knows that there are three siblings. as talented as our attorney general is, the brightest and the most attractive is the sister. thank you for coming today as well. there is a serious point here. in the intelligence business, you have to keep secrets. -- yourn any promise learn and you promise. it works better if your partner understand and support to an knows not to ask questions. thank you. appreciate that. a few points i will make about the intli