>> thank you for being here today. ago, after losing up and on the ballot in 2012, the rnc chairman stood in this building and unrevealed what has been known as the autopsy report. they admitted they were relating ating huge swathes of voters. on theiring an autopsy

autopsy. he reportedly received makes one thing clear. 365 days later, the party is just one year older. what changes we have seen are superficial and technical, but do a look -- do little to address their core problem. they have an agenda that prioritizes opportunity for some rather than for all. they have hired our reach staffs. but how effective is it when you're agenda alienates the communities you are trying to reach? conducting training to help candidates talk to women. worked to shorten their primary calendar and limit debates. --they truly believe the that limiting the number of people that here's their agenda makes it less divisive question

we saw them try to take a victory lap. they have failed to change their actions are tone from the days when they said immigrants should self-support. we have heard operatives call a female candidate and empty dress. talk about women's libidos. try to downplay abuse. we have heard them use derogatory terms to describe latino immigrants. use insulting stereotypes for african-americans and for our president. support our right discrimination against lgbt americans. is onlye of rhetoric

the beginning of their problems. their policies are out of step with the majority of voters. see why anard to 2013, party identification reached a 25 year low. later, it is clear that --ir attempt at rebounding rebranding has failed. since the 2012 election, half americans -- half of all americans believe gays have a constitutional right to marry. said the party has drifted further away from them. only five percent of african-americans nationwide identify as republican. what they do not understand is their biggest problem has never been their primary calendar or campaign tactics. whor biggest problem is they are, what they believe,

what they say, and how they govern. a our report, you will find comprehensive list of examples showing the reef failure -- the failure of the gop rio grande -- rebrand. review a few examples. the first group we look that, one that the gop claims to champion -- the middle class. middle class families in particular. in the report, they said they had to be the party that would support those who can do crime -- support those looking to climb to the next rung. when i heartate, politicians say they have to raise the minimum wage, i cringe because i know that is a lie. his governor echo the sentiment americans reject abutment romney. -- rejected with may romney. matt gatese level,

recipients were too busy playing grand theft audio to get a job. at they do not understand what it means to be a middle-class family. they have blocked commonsense measures to raise the minimum wage. governorsrepublican have rejected funds that would insure millions of americans medicaid expansion. in theook at the choices 2014 midterm election, there is a party working to expand opportunity for all to read another focused only on opportunity for a few. to reach outempt to women has garnered a lot of press. but not in the way republicans hoped. it is said to be best thing to do was to organize seminars to teach their candidates how to talk to and about women. and how to run against women.

clearly, it has not worked out so well. sponsoring, they are a restrictive abortion bill without exceptions for rape. senate minority leader mitch mcconnell's political director tweeted an article featuring kentucky candidate allison's face photoshop onto obama girl. tove martin referred pregnant women as nothing more than a hoax. who can forget one of the potential residential candidates, mike huckabee, whose own words took us all through his insight into women's libido. damaging -- the most actions come from their policies, not just their words. in texas, they require that the

name on one's id and voter registration card be identical, which is a problem for women who change their names after marriage or divorce. changed -- have continued their obsession with restricting a women's right to choose. whether it is pushing the most restrictive abortion bans in generations. they continue to focus on a restrictive social agenda rather than working to create jobs, invest in infrastructure, or improve education. this may be one reason why they have recruited 30% fewer female house candidates than they have two years ago, despite creating a special recruiting program. one of the places where they have struggled the most in the last two years is in the latino community. this is not surprising, given that this is the party that the

last presidential nominee thought undocumented immigrants should self-support. since then, we have a congressman say, for every valedictorian,a someonee 100 -- proposed a -- these are buttressed by their own policies. rubioential hopeful worked with a group of senators to pass immigration reform in the senate, only to abandon the cause when he faced political backlash from the right. week, republican colleagues in the house voted to pass a bill that could dismantle the deferred action program that the moma -- the obama administration implemented in

2012. what have we seen? republicans and more than 40 states have introduced legislation or pass laws making it harder to vote. while these laws affect all voters, we know they fall disproportionately on some committees including african-american voters. they have opposed raising the and tried to cut education funding. their words have been no better. paul ryan said, we have a tailspin of culture in our inner cities. men not working. generations of men not even thinking about working or living the value cultural work.

there is a culture problem that needs to be that with. in minnesota, one state rep said if 70% of the nba's team's folded, there would be an increase in state crime -- three crime. -- in street crime. little if any attempts to demonstrate the caring for lgbt committees. the policy and rhetoric has been dismissive at past and -- at the bank and often -- has been dismissive at best and often --ly insulting three daryl metcalfe blocked his colleague from speaking on the floor of the house.

their policies and goes these remarks. -- echo these remarks. they have gone as far as trying to codify these discriminatory byws and legalize hate allowing businesses to refuse services to lgbt americans. i believe ifaid, you are a private employer, you have the right to do with your you want.at one thing that was abundantly clear in 2012. the candidate send message do not speak to the most important issues to young voters. says, we doreport not see a party that is welcoming and inclusive for all voters. report, thetopsy

gop has failed to move to becoming a more inclusive party and moved in the opposite direction. there was the passage of the bill that cut education spending by $500 million over two years. at georgia senate candidate said, i don't see education and because the solution. -- in the constitution. they continue to advocate for policies that directly undermine the needs of young americans. republicans have voted more than 50 times to repeal or dismantle the affordable care act. kick young people off their parents'plans. the standard behind the ryan budget that would make college less affordable. ,o matter the state

demographics, region, the rio grande has failed to make any changes that will make them more successful it at the ballot box. every claim they make about reaching out and getting people involved is undercut every time their governors and specter is -- secretaries of state restrict voter registration. what democrats understand is our reach is not just about deploying bodies. it's about developing policies that will increase opportunity and showing respect for all americans. that is why democrats are expanding the electorate, getting more people in democracy, and engaging the next generation. beenis what democrats have about. looking to 2014, we will continue to be inclusive. core the gop changes their policies, no report or rhetoric or training will change their outcome. 2014 will be a change -- choice.

increasing opportunity for some verses opportunity for all. as you can see from the report, our vest weapon may be republicans themselves. thanks so much and i look forward to your questions. >> -- >> do me a favor and tell me where you are from. a chance republicans could take control of the senate? >> we have opportunities across the country. the u.s.bents, running aggressive bottom-up campaigns that will reach voters where they are. the problem that the republicans continue to have is they are continuing to alienate swaths of voters. i'm confident we will hold the senate. you said a minute ago, the

the best weapon may be republicans themselves. when you look at the challenges of the midterm election, some of the polling data you are we hope that a richard murdoch shows up? >> we are not basing the outcome. we didn't win on hail marys. datan because we built a and technological advantage that we are maintaining through our project iv. focusing not just on voter protection, but focusing on voter expansion. we are making sure we register voters. get them turned out to vote. making sure that every vote counts.

we are working on pushing hard back against the republicans. allow grassroots volunteers to fight back at the local level on republican tax and lies. -- attacks and lies. if you look at last year, the november election, in the general election, there was a virginiaion mark in about whether democrats would replicate our ground game. i think the governor would say we were effective at doing that. that was the as we had a partnership and well coordinated effort from the dnc to the gaa -- dga and state party. nitty-gritty,me a have trained more than thousand staffers through our partnership. we are not talking about

sensitivity training like the republicans have to do. training them mean -- in using our tools. making sure the innovations we -- onwe have on the staff the ground staff trained in how to use them. and we continue to deploy them. the voter turnout -- would be different for democrats than the historical trend? be?would that we have atom line is firm voter count. there is no question about that. when democratic voters turnout, democratic candidates when you read that is the bottom line. -- candidates win. that is the bottom line. us todvantage has allowed

exponentially increase the reach of our volunteers on the ground and neighborhood team leaders. community coordinators. we have married our technological advantage with our superiority in terms of grassroots. the difference between our focus and the republicans is culturally, for over a decade, we have been a bottom-up party. it takes a long time to build the kind of operation that we have been able to build across the country on the ground. throwing a few outreach staffers around the country and communities they have not been in does not change the fact that they do not have that grassroots scorcher in their party -- culture embedded in their party. mentioned the 2013 election, but not governor

christie. reached out in these communities. even though his latest polls have shown he has come down because democrats have come back to being opposed to him, he is still more popular than president obama. where is the evidence that -- he is talking about the -- being the guy who changed. >> i think it is humor that chris christie is the example that is the best example of republicans evolving. if that is what they are going to hang their hat on, a guy who senior staff -- whose senior staff retaliated, then i think we are going to be ok. issue of theger

president's approval ratings, how concerned are you about the president's popularity in trying to win some of these races? >> to go back to your question. opportunities that republicans have right now on so many things. minimum wage. the bill was put on the floor of the house. it was passed. that is why they didn't put it on the floor, because they don't want to pass it. comprehensive immigration reform. abouttopsy report talked how they were going to get their clock cleaned in the latino community read -- community. the only thing they mentioned

that their problem was in reaching latino voters was they didn't support immigration reform. where are we a year later? they still don't support immigration reform trade in their meeting, they would not include a pathway to citizenship in their platform that they said was designed to adopt comprehensive immigration reform. the only thing that they focused not education or health care, jobs -- those are all things that are actually higher on the priority list from the polling i am aware of for hispanic reform -- voters then immigration reform. in my congressional district, i represent a district 22% hispanic. immigration reform is not the first thing on voters minds. they care about making sure their kids can get the best

education. republicans continue to focus on cutting student loans. cutting education. hispanicsharder for to close the education achievement gap. which we know is a challenge. often high school and college. -- both in high school and college. it is not just the words. their words are offensive. their policies are even more disrespectful. why didn't your technological advantage work in getting him a credit turnout? >> if you take a close look at 413, that was a special election 13, that was a special election. we would have liked the outcome to be different. that was a special election. the republicans want in a democratic -- republican district. bill young, over the last

decade, won the district from anywhere from 15 to 30 points. when democrats votes, democrats when. turnout, in terms of what the electorate looks like, is critical. a special election in the midterm is not reflective of what the general election electorate will look like. looking at the november election, we are confident we have a much stronger opportunity for democratic candidates to win. last november. general election that was a test case, we used our ground game with our technological advantage to make sure terry mcauliffe was elected governor. that will be a decision that alex has to make. her.is a question for

>> [indiscernible] the immigration issue is not the biggest one for hispanic voters. democrats pushing comprehensive immigration reform. my main question is, is the party going to push deportation -- stop deportation -- as many hispanic voters want you to do? [indiscernible] boy, this is firing up our base.

is the democratic party going to keep insisting -- >> let me disagree with your premise. i said it was not the only important issue. you can't say it is not important issue. it is an important issue. it is important issue to many hispanic families. let me tell you, having represented the hispanic community for a long time, emily value.ly is a core the reason that we support immigration reform is because it is the right thing to do rate it is morally right. million undocumented immigrants that are here because they want to make a better life for themselves and their families rate we would be stupid

if we do not ensure they have an opportunity to be here. they are the backbone of our economy. we need to make sure they can come out of the shadows. they don'tmake sure have to constantly live with the angst of worrying their family members will be sent back to where they came from. that is what the republicans feel. the president has announced the review of the deportation policy and directed the department of homeland security to take a look at how we can make sure our policy is more humane. i support that. >> thank you, congressman. a number of us were at a breakfast earlier today. he said it is going to be a tsunami is democrats. statesmocrats running in -- is the affordable care act ?nd asset -- an assett

>> i hope my counterpart remains bullish and believes the democrats are in the dumps. they were predicting up to hours before the hours -- polls closed that we would be inaugurating mitt romney. their prediction accuracy is not on the marks as of late. when it comes to the competitive races across the country, we are focused on making sure we get our voters turned out. focused on the next generation through project iv. at the dnc, we are focused on expanding the number of voters that are eligible to register and cast their ballot. we are focused on making sure we can promote the democratic agenda which includes the contract between democrats who people cane sure

continue to not worry about being dropped or denied coverage. in adults can stay on their parents insurance. --iors that i stand behind when five or six prescriptions come to the counter, they had to live -- leave two or three behind. i will take the difference between a republican candidate who wants to take all that away from those folks a democratic candidate who think those benefits should remain. let me get someone who has not asked the question. you talked a lot about the turnout and the issues the party faced in florida. have you figured out issueically where the the was the operation or message?

>> it takes about five weeks after an election to get the full, metadata. data.l comlpiment of at -- take a close look this is a seat that bill young 5-30% over by 1 several years. we are part of the ground game we ran. -- proud of the ground game we ran. she closed the gap in a special, challenging election. know when we look at november and you have a broader general election, we are going to have a much better opportunity to win the seat.

and that is our job to make sure we turnout our voters. that is our job at the national and state parties. it is what we have focused on. continuing to build our partnerships with state parties. making sure that campaigns benefit up and down the ballot from the data we have altogether. -- we have built together. turn them out. thank you all so much. coming up tonight on c-span, russian president vladimir putin talks about russia's lands to annex crimea. secretary of state john kerry response to president clinton's remarks. -- putin'st clinton remarks.

>> tuesday, russian president vladimir putin defended russia's move to annex the region of crimea. speech, he said the move to annex crimea was in international law. his remarks are courtesy of "russia today." >> good afternoon members of the council. this thing was representatives of the republic of crimea. -- distinguished representatives of the republic of crimea. russian citizens. [applause]

[applause] >> my friends, today we are gather to talk about a very important issue. it is a historic issue for all of us. crimea saw a referendum that took place in line with the democratic procedures and international law. 82% of the voters took part in a referendum.

were in favor of rejoining russia. [applause] these are very telling figures. to understand why this choice was made, we need to take a glimpse into the history of the crimea. we need to understand the value of russia to crimea and the importance of crimea to russia. everything is related to russian history. you have places where asian knights wereient baptized. they laid the foundation to unite russia and ukraine.

the places were soviet soldiers are across crimea. means sevastopol, the city of legends. it is the place where the russian fleet is more. -- moored. [applause] is a legendary city and town. these are cities that are symbols of russia's thoughts and might. crimea has many traditions and cultures. it looks similar to russia. no ethnicity disappeared and crimea.

serbs,s, ukrainians, crimea. -- crimeans. they present their culture and faith. there are 2 million people of the crimean population. 50% of them are russian. there are also ukrainians who believe that the russian language as their native language. there are a proportion of crimean tartar's. they look to russia. when somea period ethnicities had to go through injustice and hardship. people ofons of different ethnicities suffer from oppressions. tartars should go back to the land where they belong.

it is a decision that would complete the process of rehabilitation. [applause] >> the decision would restore their minds and reputations. there are many ethnicities that reside in crimea. that is their homeland. we would support that. there are three state languages. russian, ukrainian, and crimean tartar. [applause] colleagues, crimea has always been an integral part of russia. been preserved from generation to generation.

faith has live the role of the dramatic changes that our country has gone through. after the revolution, the bolsheviks included crimea, ukraine. they did that without taking into account the composition of the territory. they have handed over crimea and sevastopol. the initiative belongs to mr. khrushchev. what was his motive? wanted to shift the

.lame for the repression he has left historians of all of these issues. that was done behind stages. course, there is a totalitarian state. they have free will. we will realize through the grand scheme of things that this is a mere formality. we used to belong to one big country, the soviet union. it is inconceivable that sometime in the future russia and ukraine would be divided, different states. that has happened.

thoughts that were unbelievable has become a reality. it has unfolded in such a fast way. none of the nations realize the dramatic nature. and theple in ukraine former soviet republic have -- have believed that the huge commonwealth of states would become [inaudible] promised aand -- common economic space. remains just on paper. we have not seen a new country in march. crimea ended up at a different stage. insia realized that it was broad daylight. we have to admit that russia contributed by asking

everyone to take sovereignty. oblivion. in countryt to bed in one and woke up in a totally different country. minorities. overnight. the russian people have become one divided nation. crimeans say that they were handed over just like a sack of potatoes. do? did the russians did they give up? realities. with the

that bitter situation. the country within in a state where it could not protect the people. it could not put up with that injustice. many citizens reads that issue. many said that crimea is a russian lands. a russian city. we all realize that. we all felt that. we had to make realities. we had to build on that. we want to work with ukraine, are fraternal nation. russians will always be the most important. [applause]

today i would like to share with you the details of the negotiation. president asked me to speed up the process of a legitimate nation without borders. previously russia recognize crimea as part of ukraine. there were no negotiations over the borders. the complications involved. this processhat should be sped up. consent toive our the limitations. we recognize parts of ukrainian territory. we close the issue. limitation ofhe

certain areas. those were our motives. we need good relations with ukraine. that is the most important thing. it should not be held hostage to some territorial issue. is alieve that ukraine good neighbor. people woulding benefit from a civilized, friendly face. their legal rights would be insured. these were our hopes. the situation unfolded in a different way. to ban the russian language and to assimilate the and to makelation russians like other minorities suffered from a constant political crisis.

ukraine has been going through for 20 years. if i knew what people in ukraine wanted to change. during those years of they have been fed up with the power. [applause] presidents have changed. they come and go. mps coming go. their attitudes to the country stay the same. they use ukraine at the cow they milk. they use it for the financial flows. they do not understand the realities on the ground. ukrainians have had to flee ukraine. they have had to work in other countries. they have to do our jobs.

about 3 million ukrainians work in russia. about 20 billion u.s. dollars, 12% of ukraine's gdp. i sympathize with peaceful slogans. poverty exists as a procedure to change our. they have to keep in mind that they want to stage a coup. another clue. -- coup. they wanted to seize power, regardless of anything. they would use terror, violence, pogroms.brahms -- and

they defy their political representatives. they tried to revise their language policies. that undermines the rights of minorities. the responses of those , curators of authority, explain them. they should not do so. they realize what a fewer ukrainian state would look like. in the reserve. it is still there. everyone is trying to read nor it.

-- ignore it. realize what the ukrainian neo-nazi forces want to do. one of their members is an associate of adolf hitler in ukraine. many of these people claim to be officials. they do not control the situation in their own country. we have no one to negotiate with. they are controlled by radicals. ministers, of the you need to get permission from the government on the my don -- maidan. these are the realities of the situation in ukraine. i'm not kidding. people who resisted were threatened with oppression.

threatened first. that is why the city of sevastopol as russia to take their lives into account. -- toly what happens avoid what happened in key of -- kiev. we could not leave crimeans in the lurch. [applause] first and foremost, we need to create conditions in slovenia so that they can exercise in a free world their rights of self-determination. we tell our colleagues in the west and europe? they say we are violating international law. --is good that they entered

remember international law sometimes. better late than never. [applause] >> secondly, what did we violate? [inaudible] strictly speaking, we have not exercised this right. russian forces have not been in crimea. they were in crimea. they have strengthened the contention. there is a limit on the personnel. it is in line with the agreement. that limit is 25,000 troops. we have not increased the personnel.

when the crimean legislature give the referendum, nation the right to self determination. ukraine did the same when it seceded from the soviet union. have made that decision, but crimeans are denied that right? . why? they have strangled themselves with their own hands. the situation is completely insane. they recognize coast of oh, and they've proved that they don't actually need permission from social authorities to declare your country a sovereign one.

the u.n. agree it. -- agreed with that. no genuine ban on unilateral declarations of -- there have been no documents in council that have any precedent on that. international law has no bands in general on declaring independence. it is very clear. documents,ten quote but i will give you one more. here is a written memorandum. u.s. dated 2009. again, i will quote.

in the declaration on they cannot, violate domestic legislation, but that does not mean a breach of international law. ". quote.of they are pressuring everyone to recognize laws. why? [applause] reactions of crimea are in line with their own memo. thing, buty do one the same thing will be denied to ukrainians, russians, and crimean tartar's. the u.s. said that it was a

unique case. why is it so unique? they say that there were a lot of casualties during the conflict. is that the legal argument? the u.n. court of justice never mentioned that. this does not just come standard. this is primitive. thingsnot use the same for your own interests. you cannot call something black one day and white the next day. do we need to allow casualties to happen? we could have seen the same casualties had it not been for the crimean self defense forces. [applause]

we did not see any armed conflict in crimea. why? the answer is simple. you cannot fight against the free will of the people. it is impossible. thank those to that certain ukraine. and theynot open fire do not have blood on their hands. [applause] there are other thoughts coming up. ,hey accuse us of aggression some invasion of ukraine. remember a single

interventionre an took place without a single shot. what is happening in ukraine situationhe unfolding around the world. the [inaudible] was removed, there had been no more civility. u.s. preferred to use a strong hands. they believe that they are unique. entrustedve they are to decide the fate of other people. they do the way the bank. -- they think. i do whatever they want to. it is a zero-sum game.

states toure other get the revolutions the way they need. if they cannot do it, they ignore the security council. 1999 withhe case in yugoslavia. century,d of the 20th foreuropean capitals -- several weeks, that was belgrade. an intervention took place. there was a resolution. then we had afghanistan. resolution on the libya. they did not just administering no-fly zone. there were a series of revolutions.

this countries are tired of tyranny, poverty, no prospects. the sentiment was exploitative. it did not fit with traditions and culture of what we have. violence andve is revolutions. the arab spring has been replaced by the arab winter. we saw the same scenario in 2007 in ukraine. invented a third round of presidential elections. that was a breach of law. deploy a well-trained army of the government. we understand the reason. ukraine is against the

integration approach of eurasia. wanted to have a genuine dialogue with the west. we are always interested in cooperation. work on an equitable basis. we want to have honest relationships. we did not see that. we were cheated. we were deceived. decisions were taken behind our backs. nato made an expansion to the east. there were deployment of military troops. we were given the same mantra. it is none of your business. you can say that easily. same with the missile defense. it is still going on. that was the same procrastination on the visa agreement.

now we are threatened with sanctions. we are living in a world of limits. it is critical to our economy. in the cold war, the u.s. and introduced aes on items and goods. now this band has been removed. formal.st many of them are still in play. the policy determines. it is still there. we have always been cornered. that is because we have an independent position. we are defending it and we call a speed a spade. we are not hypocritical. ukraine, they

were our partners across the line. it would be unprofessional. [applause] they knew perfectly well that for millions of russians in why didnd ukraine -- they lose sight of the approach? they were shortsighted. they did not think of the consequences. they found themselves at a stage of curtains. we would give up. you pull the spring too hard, it will recoil. russia is active in international affairs. we have national interest that we need to consider.

[applause] of course, we appreciate the action of countries that respects our decisions. china.ion of i want to thank their leadership. they view the situation in its --store call, cultural historical, cultural concepts. reaction.ate their i would like to address the people of the u.s.. proud that freedom is above all for them. but what about the free will of crimean.

is that not the same value? i do believe that europeans are understanding. the germans understand us. ,he reunification of germany that with a high level issue. which werentries allies of germany then, not all of them supported the idea of reunification. the soviet union did support that. it was up to germans to engage in reunification. germany will support the decision of russia to restore unity.

[applause] to address the people of want to you don't damage your system. we respect the cultural sovereignty of ukraine. there are those who use greek their agenda. to unite a slogan ukraine, but they split ukraine. they are to blame for the divisions the country is experiencing. you cannot say that russia will ignore that and take other regions. we do not need that.

crimea has always been and always will be russian, ukrainian, and crimean tartare. [applause] i will repeat that. it will be the home to all the ethnicities. [applause] it will never belong to one alone. crimea is our common legacy.

it should go where it belongs. [applause] otherwise, -- i would like to address russians and ukrainians alike. we could lose crimea. it could happen very soon. think about that. of kia heard statements -- kiev that they are planning to join nato. what would that mean to crimea and seven stopple -- sevastopol?

it would be a threat to the south of russia. it would be a real threat. but it happen. happen.could [applause] in thes free will crimea. course, we welcome nato -- cooperation of nato, but we do not want a military alliance. we do not want a military invasion to be present near our homes or historical lands. that we wouldne go to seven stopple -- sevastopol and be welcomed by nato. [applause]

let them come over to sevastopol. we sympathize with the people of ukraine. they do not know what will be in the future. their concerns are legitimate. neighbors,just close but we are one nation. kiev is the mother of all russian cities. [applause] ukraine is our roots in russia. we cannot live without each other. millions of russians live in ukraine. protect theirways

interests using political, diplomatic, and legal means. [applause] all, the ukraine should observing thend rights of its people. -- that is what will strengthen the stability of the country. that will ensure their sovereignty. we want ukraine to be a strong state. it is one of our major partners. we have so many joint projects. i believe that despite everything, the most important thing will be reconciliation with ukraine. we want other countries to contribute to this. the ukrainianso themselves to restore peace and order in their homes. this thing was crimeans and the residents of sevastopol, russia

admired her courage and dignity. -- fighted the flight in crimea. [applause] during those days, we were as close as ever. we supported each other. we see the maturity of nations. russia has expressed its strong will and maturity. [applause] a strong foreign-policy for the free will of millions of -- i would like to

thank all of you for this. strong to riset up to the challenges. we are facing opposition from the west. whetherto make it clear we are ready to pursue national interest. there are threats of sanctions. there are threats of internal problems. this is meant to incite problems. did they want to worsen living conditions in russia? we will respond to these issues

in an appropriate way. we will never seek confrontation. either in the west or the east. we will take all of the steps to be good neighbors just like it should be in a modern world. crimea has a clear language. whether they want to stay as part of ukraine or to join russia. the leadership was in the interests of people. then you have a referendum. is based on demographics,

social and historical background, and it will only lead to an escalation in the situation around crimea. it is to the detriment of the people. crimeans put it bluntly. it was a straightforward referendum. it took place in an open and fair way. crimeans have demonstrated that they want to be with russia. [applause] russia will have to take a very complicated view. there are internal and external practices. we have different opinions.

does the position of the absolute majority align with these? you've seen the recent polls. believe% of russians that russia needs to protect the interests of russians and other nations. 95%. [applause] 83% believe that russia must do it, even if this position would complicate our relations with other states. 83%. 86% are convinced that crimea is still part of russia. [applause] they are part of russian lands.

almost -- this is a very important figure -- it does correlate with what you saw. shouldieve that crimea be made part of russia. [applause] so as we have seen, the consent of the russians and the crimeans have occurred. they all support reunification with crimea. [applause]

>> now it is up to russia to make a political decision. it is based on the free will of the people. they are a source of power. distinguished members, federation council, deputies of the state, citizens of russia, citizens in crimea, based on the result of the referendum that took place in crimea and the free will of the people, [inaudible] we want to welcome two new parts

of russia. sevastopol. [applause] and to rectify the treaty affecting crimea and sevastopol as part of russia. >> on our facebook page, we ask

if you think u.s. sanctions on russia were enough? our viewer said -- another one from daniel. he writes -- you can continue the conversation on facebook.com/cspan. >> secretary of state john kerry said that russian president claimir putin's move to crimea as part of russia is on the wrong side of history. he is speaking to university students at a town hall meeting. disappointed in president clinton's remarks. this is 45 minutes. -- president vladimir putin's remarks. this is 45 minutes. >> i apologize for being late.

we have a few things on the plate. i got held up. i was on a phone call with the prime minister of a country. [laughter] the phone call dropped multiple times. that is modern communications, i guess. i am deeply appreciative that you are here. ambassador ed perkins, thank you for being with us. he is one of the founders of the school. we are grateful to you for being here today. do we have be deemed hear from uva? folks?a

now i have to give a shout out to every college. i am in trouble. thank you for being part of this. start first of all by chancethat today i had a to read a speech given by vladimir putin. it was in the kremlin. it was in respect to ukraine. i must say that i was really struck and somewhat surprised and even disappointed by the aserpretations of the facts they were articulated by the president. with all due respect, they did not jive with the reality of the situation and what is happening on the ground. the president may have his version, but i believe that he and russia are on the wrong side

of history. thatis clear to me is international law means something. it means something because the international community came together over a period of time to give it that meeting. it was well established by law -- how countries can succeed from their own countries. that is supposed to happen according to their constitution. -- and their legal process. if that is not available to them, there are procedures by the international community. you cannot go into a country with god is to augment troops that are rd there and then suggest that there were no is -to forces -- don augment- guns to augment troops

that are already there and then suggest that there were no russian forces. we have to deal with reality it is very dangerous to see the rise of this kind of nationalism that if exercised unilaterally. it is to the exclusion of the international legal process. ways that can in be dangerous. that is what we have worked hard to avoid since world war ii. it is a division that many presidents have brought to the international table over the years. grievance, you try to work it out through the process. anyone haveeve that a sense that fill in the situation was the last resort. result, we have this tension in this challenge -- and

this challenge is international structure. president obama has been clear. there will be a cost attached to this. wanted, notwe because we are seeking confrontation, but because when people move unilaterally in this way, to test the world structure, it is important for every country in the world' understand that the law means something and if there are cost attached to a breach of that duty and responsibility. i have heard much about how close to vote was a model for this. it is not a model. not a model at all. the united nations passed a resolution. it was stationed under international law. there was nobody in crimea and needed protection the day goes troops entered. except perhaps the ukrainian

forces who were threatened at gunpoint having to give up their weapons. us ind facts to guide international affairs. heed ouro responsibilities as nations to live by these international laws and standards. we need to expect that others will too. i hope that in the days ahead, we have the ability to be able to live by that higher and better standard. the president has made it clear that if there is this move to full annexation, which appears to be the direction in which we are headed, it will be unfortunate. it will not be because we want to create some kind of confrontation. it will be because there is no

choice but to enforce the standards that the international community has worked on for so long. that is where we are. that even aswith we deal with these other challenges that are very real. we will look for the ways to bring the world together around the need to meet the challenges , iran's nuclear weapons, afghanistan, south-central asia. many parts of the world. what is amazing -- and let me just comment. i was in the senate for a long time. had 1300e years, i interns come to my office. it is a lot of people. a lot of them have gone on to run for office. they are involved in various endeavors. i am very proud of them. aren't public

service. that is important. -- far in public service. that is important. something about going to college in the greater washington area is this ability to synthesize in some sleepy class one day a future gridlock breaker or gridlock creator. [laughter] many interesting how congressmen, senators, various high level of point he is have cut their teeth -- i point these -- appointees have cut their teeth that interns. they had a thirst for knowledge and for the action of governors. -- governance. we have to close the gap in this country. we have some serious challenges here at home. you all know that. it is vital that we do that. what we get done here at home is what we are capable of taking

two other parts of the world. it is what we project. it is what people test this by. is not enough to say that we are exceptional in one way or another. the reason we can point to american exceptionalism is because we have done exceptional things. we continue to do exceptional things. we have to live up to that standard, your generation and mine. the fact is that that one percent is a magnificent one percent. one penny on every dollar. america with enormous reach in the world. , our aid and development programs, our battle against aids. significantly in africa, the cuts are program.

-- another program that has saved millions of children's lives. it is about to produce and eight-free generation. it is an extraordinary accomplishment. that comes of that penny on the dollar. not to mention all 285 of our embassies and consulates around the world which take care of .eople we issued 12 million passwords last year. while million. -- 12 million. countless numbers of people travel abroad. what we are excited about and that we will unveil today is a presentation by the department called state-by-state. what we are going to do, and this is why i came to uva to give my first speech of my tenure as secretary of state is because foreign policy is not just about what happened over there.

it is about what happens over here as a result of what happens over there. the security and peace that we can bring to american, the stability that comes to our relationships, orough nato or proxy on -- various associations where we work through rule of law and international structure. is about a new jersey company that kept $144 million contracts to build bridges in another country. that means jobs here at home. it is about another company that is laying fiber-optic cables between samoa and the rest of the world so they can be connected. that is a $500 million contract. that is jobs here at home. we will show you state for state. you can come online in such a state. go to a district. will find out what is coming to that district or state as a result of our efforts to help

a contract or an economic opportunity with the capacities that we have been very parts of our country. means jobs your home. it is real. in a globalized world, i see a lot of smartphones. look at me here. this is the connections we have. instantaneous, to everywhere in the world. do you know what happened and her readers square, in egypt? it was young people -- terror square, intahrir egypt? it was young people connected to each other. same thing in tunisia. it preventer who is tired -- a fruit vendor who was tired and frustrated at being slapped around by the police and what did he sell his goods of his stance, and he could not do it

because an officer was harassing him, he went down and sell them related in front of the police ated in -- self-immol front of the police station. the dictator was gone within days. that's the power of day and that's why there is so much turmoil and energy at the same time. there are failed states where you have these greedy people for whom it is not enough simply to have some power and to be able to do good for people, but who want to get rich while doing it at the expense of people. we have people stealing from the people who they are supposed to represent and levels of corruption are absolutely extraordinary in various places. and the result is, people feel that. and if you're young and 65% of

much of the middle east is under the age of 30, 65%. i was talking to one of my staff who told me, i don't remember the country and i should, but i apologize but the median age is 15 years old. there are a bunch of countries like that, frankly. and if you are 50% under the age of 21 and 40% under the age of 18 and you don't have a chance to go to school and you don't have a chance to get a job, even though you may have been educated and went to the university of cairo or american university in cairo and ready to go and can't do it, that's tension, it's huge in the social fabric and structure of the place. and that's what's going on in a lot of places. it's a clash of aspirations and opportunity and modernity and

culture all at the same time and it creates a huge tension and as clyptocrats hese you have failed states in many places and governance becomes a roblem and when you have supremism you have them filling the vacuum and those extremes are dangerous. they don't have a plan for health care or plan for education, they don't offer you anything other than you have to live the way i want you to. and if you don't, you're the enemy. and particularly those of us who offer real freedom and real opportunity and self-determination and a whole bunch of other things, really scary to some of them. so, we live in interesting times. slogan curse and chinese

about opportunity. it means opportunity. and so we, you, have this extraordinary playing field, kind of staring you in the face as you go through college and i think george bernard shaw says youth is wasted on the young. getting older, i feel that. but i hope you guys will make the most of it. and i think by being here you have already indicated you want to. i look forward to a good conversation here, a chance to answer some questions, focus on a few of the things that i tried to maybe stimulate a little thinking, if you haven't already landed there and hopefully we can share -- how much time do we have? a few minutes left? good.

all right. [applause] >> thank you, mr. secretary. i'll start with a couple of questions and people can line up to the two microphones that are on either side of the aisle. i would like to go back to the ukraine. we saw administration announced sanctions against the russian officials. what is the administration to do if russia invades east ukraine? >> you know, we have made it very clear that that is a hard line in terms of the level -- i mean that will be a major breach . and i hope we don't get there. i'm not going to go into the details except to say that would that egregious as any step i can think of that can be taken by a country in today's world, particularly by a country like

russia where so much is at stake. now i hope that's not going to be the case. president putin in his speech today did say that he did not envision a struggle between east and west over this issue, that there was a huge historic connection between russians and ukranians, that he wanted to see that they could resolve the future in a peaceful way. so i don't want to start laying out a whole series of specifics about the option until we measure where we are obviously and put that to the test. but today is egregious enough en you raise this national fervor which could, in fact, infect in ways that could be very, very dangerous. go back and read in history of the lead-up to world war ii and the passions that were released

with that kind of nationalistic fervor and there is a tough history of check slaffvack yeah in 1968 where the rational was to protect the people in it. you go ask the poles about how they felt about being protected for all those years. so this is very questionable activity and we have to be very wary but i'm not going to go into the specifics, but that would be an enormous blow to the international community and would require a response that is commensurate with the level of that challenge. >> one more from me, you mentioned pepfar and we heard from the administration there will be aid given to several countries. we had a story up on buzz feed

yesterday, quoting a bunch of senators, quoting several people on the hill saying they received no direction from the administration on what they should be considering. can you outline some of the principles that the administration is ready to apply to aid to countries like uganda? >> we are formulating those guidelines because of the signing in uganda recently. there has been already a review taking place and to my -- i did not know this until this review was taking place, but there are 80 countries that have laws of one kind or another that discriminate. we are reviewing all of those to figure out what the options are changeow we can begin to minds, move leaders, reach the public, same kind of education frankly, that took place in our

country. measure where we were a few years ago. i will tell you as a senator, when i was running for president 2004, this was a very big hot-button issue that was exploited on the hill in many different ways. i think it was in 2003, 2004, i was one of only 14 senators to vote against domea and i was the only senator running for election that year to do so. i'm prove of that. i was proven correct when it was thrown out as unconstitutional. we are still going through this in various places. we are making enormous progress. there are places in the world that we have to reach out. one of the things we have already started to do -- i had some 200 chief submissions from all over the worldcom in last ek or two weeks ago and we

focused in during that on a session where we talked about how everybody in every one of those consulates and embassies is going to have a responsibility to become an advocate of facts, with facts, to go out and try to figure out what's the strategy for this country. one thing i would have to say, it is going to have to be country by country. i don't think you are going to find different countries who have different needs, different sensitivities. what we are going to try to do is put together the overall umbrellas program by region by region and country by country. and that's what we are developing. >> uganda? >> i talked to the president a committed o and he to meet with several of our

experts so that we could engage him in a dialogue as to why what he did could not be based on any kind of science or fact, which is what he was alleging. and he with comed that and said we can engage in that conversation and that's what we are going to do. that is the approach to that particular place and maybe we can reach a point of reconsideration. >> if you guys are ready to ask your questions, just identify yourselves by name and where you're from. >> secretary kerry, i'm a sophomore at the college of william and mary and my question is given that both qatar and saudi arabia are allies how do you receive the expulsions in the region? >> we take it very seriously. i talked to one of the ministers in the gulf cooperation council and we are concerned about it

because the gulf cooperation council is a very important entity within which we have an enormous amount of interests. and it's important to us that the cohesion that has existed within the gulf cooperation council is very, very important to many priorities that we have within the region. our hope is that this can find a resolution, but it's very difficult right now. a number of countries feel particularly strongly that qatar has been operating in a way that is outside of the interests of the council and of those countries. and there's a real clash. it's unfortunate, but it's the reality and it's -- they are going to have to work it flue through but we are going to encourage them as much as possible to do so and hope very much this can be resolved soon. >> thank you. >> secretary kerry, with regard

-- you were talking about the digital age and its effect on egypt. when we were lining up to get in this building, media outlets were reporting the recent closures of the embassies -- syrian embassies in washington, d.c.,. what are your thoughts moving forward and what this means for syria and the situation in crimea, what would the focus be moving forward. >> i'm not sure of its impact on crimea. but we just felt very strongly that the illegitimate si of the ,ssad regime is so overwhelming 140,000 people killed, more than 10,000 children, millions of refugees, millions of internally-displaced people,

people attacked with gas, people tortured and killed by thousands. a documentable account of almost 11,000. extraordinary violence perpetrated by the government of dropping barrel bombs on its own population, some kind of chemical being dropped on kids in schools indiscriminately, indiscriminately attacking civilians by doing an old-fashioned siege and starving them in their villages and we have seen the pictures of the corpses. i mean it's -- you can't believe you are in 2014. and so we just felt the idea that this embassy is sitting here with representation that we could take seriously, is an insult and we closed it. it's that simple. and we'll see what happens in other places, but the assad regime can never regain

legitimacy in syria, whether they win, don't win, they can't regain legitimacy. the people of that country who have been driven out as kids, parents, brothers, sisters, grandfathers have been killed, are never going to look to him for leadership. and so i think this is a -- one of the great compelling things. and we are working in so many different ways, we are the largest donor of any nation in the world to the humanitarian side of this to the refugees in the camps and we are aiding the opposition in a number of different ways. and we will continue to do that. and we will augment that if we have to. there's a lot on the table. >> i was curious as to -- >> sorry, there are so many people waiting. go ahead. >> good try, though. i admire your spirit. >> can i follow up on that

really quickly? sorry guys. do you have any concern the fact that relations are so bad with russia right now that that is going to affect cooperation on syria getting rid of the chemical weapons, but also on what's going to happen with iran? >> obviously, we really hope not. we hope that russia will realize beyond what is happening in crimea, that it has serious interests that haven't changed, the interests that brought it to the table originally to work with us are the same interests today. and so if you are serious about nonproliferation, then you shouldn't walk away from the responsibility to make sure iran does not have a nuclear weapon. if you are serious about wanting to end the war in syria and keep chemical weapons out of the hands of terrorists, you shouldn't walk away to finish the deal that you helped broker. what's significant is, we have been able despite differences

with russia to find areas of significant cooperation on the big ticket items, afghanistan, start treaty, nuclear weapons, on iran, on syria, on other things. we have been able to cooperate. even as we have some differences and serious differences on other things. that is the tragedy what has happened with respect to crimea. nobody that i know of who reads the facts doubts russia's interests in crimea. that's not at issue here. russia has an enormous historical connection to ukraine. kiev is the -- i mean this is the birth place of the russian religion. it has extraordinary connections. we know this. but that doesn't legitimatize just taking what you want because you want it. or because you are angry about the end of the cold war or the end of the soviet union or whatever it is. you need to work through the

operative process. the government -- the interim government in kiev, the prime minister, has publicly stated, and i have seen the plan, that they are completely prepared to work on full representation in the country, full protection of minority rights, full protection of chutches, full protection of russian language, all of those things can happen. but they ought to happen through the legitimate legislative process, not at the butt of a arrive will. >> i want to say thank you for all you are doing to fight climate change. it is a critically important issue for my generation. rumors are rampant that you will be realming approval or rejection of the keystone xl pipeline. >> that's not a rumor. >> say no to the keystone xl pipeline and ask how do you

think a decision to invest in the world's third largest oil reserves would be per seffed by other countries considering their own investments either in tar sands. >> we have just time for one more question after this. >> i don't know what i have -- i can't? . d you hear him say i'm sorry are you sure. have to go back -- i'm sorry. [laughter] plusnow have 1.9 million -one comments on keystone. >> i did one. >> i respect so much the passions on both sides of that issue. and really, we have had one -- we have had almost two million people commenting on the most recent e.i.s. it's 11 volumes long, thousands

of pages. i need to review it. and my job is to stay down the middle, neutral, measure it. obviously against some life experiences, but on the facts and then render an opinion to the president of the united states as to whether or not i find it is in the national interest. i have to get the input from i think some 11 different agencies so there is a massive job of information sifting and accumulation here. and i honestly -- i'm not commenting in any other way on it to anybody, including my wife and others, all of whom have opinions. [laughter] >> one last question. >> secretary kerry, i'm with the university of georgia but was born in ukraine.

>> i don't have my braids today. but i was disturbed recently by the rise in putin's approval rating in russia given his policy in ukraine. that is frankly a little bit terrifying and i heard the other day a statistic that only about 11% of russians have regular access to the internet. almost makes it difficult for us to give them any other kind of message besides what they are earing from some firms and nasty propaganda that is being told about us. should we be reaching out to those 89% or -- >> absolutely we should be. and i appreciate the question very much. it's very, very difficult. i am told -- i was in kiev a couple weeks ago, and i heard

and saw some of what's happening propaganda-wise, but if you are in the eastern part of ukraine, you are being bombarded by russian television, which is carrying these extraordinary exaggerated sense -- you would think that the nazis had actually come back and taken over ukraine. that's what's going on. and that has huge historyal linkage to istoryal russia's past. there are economic challenges in russia and unhappiness often gets challenged into this national sort of pride and anger could be directed elsewhere. indeed, you're right. the president's approval ratings has gone up significantly.

everybody's feeling great about flexing their muscles about this , quote, achievement, as they put it, but in the end, i think it's going to be very costly if they continue to go down that kind of a road, because it will wind up -- and in the vote in the united nations on a resolution was 13 in favor of the resolution, one and extension, china, and one no, russia. i call that isolation. and i think that's what's going to begin to happen in various ways if this were to continue. our hope is that we can find a way out, but today was very confrontational and very -- about a breach of international law and people are deeply concerned about it. >> thank you.

>> one more i'm told. >> lucky me. >> thank you so much for doing this. you're amazing. [laughter] >> do you want to hear the question about gridlock or history and the future? >> history and the future. >> i'll go with fear then. you mentioned the tension and i thought about that previously. it seems in my generation a like and so i'm wondering there is an attitude of fear that is built up in america through mccargetism and now the war on terrorism? i'm not saying i have a say on this but are we afraid of something, what is it? how does this affect us and how does it affect gridlock and the way my generation is going to react to american politics and democracy going forward? >> you are dragging me out of my

role of secretary of state and my previous role, which i try to stay away from. without getting into trouble, i will share a couple of thoughts with you. i don't think americans are fearful. i don't think americans fear very much at all. i think americans are concerned and i think they're concerned about the future, because they see gridlock and americans see a stagnation in the rate of wage increase and americans see challenges in terms of life, every day life, for education, getting your kids the opportunities they want and so forth. but we are a very optimistic people. i think america is amazing for that. it's part of our country. it was noted in the 1700's. it was noticed our charitable

giving. it was written about in terms of america, what really distinguished america was the way in which americans would get involved in charitable efforts, be involved with their neighbors and give to other people. we have a huge spirit for doing that in the united states and it is quite special. and i think there's a confidence in america -- what americans are frustrated about is a feeling that, you know decisions aren't being made that are advancing that sense of optimism in the direction that they want it to go. so there is a frustration built. i'm on every side politically. this isn't reserved to one side or the other of the political spectrum. if i took a real poll here, you would say you are agnostic which party or where you want to be or how you affiliate because that

process is losing some people to our system, losing some talent in some capacity. i don't think it's fear. i really don't put it in the category of fear. i think it's frustration and little bit of anxiety of where we are going with this turmoil in the world and how's it going to affect us, which forces people to look inwards a little bit. >> how do we fix it? >> all of you get involved, that's how we fix it. demand accountability. get involved in the political system. if you don't think someone is making good choices, tell someone what the better choices are and don't get bought out by the vast sums of money in american politics, fight that and give peoples' voices back to people. that's how you do it. [applause]

[captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> president obama awards the medal of honor to 24 army veterans. then events from the annual atlantic economy summit. first house budget committee ranking member chris van hollen. a panel discussion examining the u.s. economy. a conversation with grover nordquist, president of americans for tax reform on the midterm elections. on the next "washington journal," american enterprise institute discusses the republican party's efforts to attract younger and minority voters. then a discussion on fundraising operations for a potential hillary clinton presidential run. a reporter on transparency in he obama administration.

"washington journal" is line every morning at 7:00 eastern. >> you can join the conversation on facebook and twitter. >> the health care problem in the united states is going to continue and not go anywhere. if we do not deal with the issue of innovation, if we do not translate all those findings that occur at the university level into health care programs ich are affordable and cures them and not only understand how to treat or cure them, there is no point in talking about the solution of the health care problem because health insurance coverage is going to provide health insurance, but when it comes to drugs, when it comes to the premiums or subsidies, where

are the subsidies going to come from? from taxpayers' money. not that people are going to get the dollars out of the trees. no. people have to pay for it. there is a limit. the economy is basically the science of limitations. if we don't deal with a better system of working on prevention, on working on understanding, how we can take care of our own health, there is no point in having health insurance, because what is going to happen is what happens in colombia right now, what happens in panama. everybody can't have access to health care or what happens in europe, too, which people are covered but when it comes to medications or access to drugs, then governments are having problems affording them. >> the future of health care unday night at 8:00 on c-span.

>> i ask if the speaker would like to continue. >> mr. speaker. >> i just want to say this. >> there is no question in my mind that the arguments and the statements that i said on this floor came to me by complaints of the members, first that they had not been notified. i don't believe this they were notified. i believe that truly that they didn't get the mail in their office, number one. number two, the sense of your letter here. i'm inviting you to hear a dialogue on my perception of what american policy and what foreign affairs should be. i'm going to go back -- you didn't tell me you were going to back to get clips or 1972 when the gentleman whom i have the great respect, the chairman of our intelligence committee, you were going to ask