that's it for today's program. , the hearingn3 what the gm ceo. you can see it again live. thank you for watching today. another show coming your way tomorrow at 7:00 a.m. we will see you there. ♪ national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] >> well, both the house and senate are in session today. the senate is continuing work on extending unemployment insurance. the houses working on seven bills, two of which deal with

the ukraine here on c-span. on budget matters, representative paul ryan will unveil what is likely to be his last disco blueprint of his tenure as house budget chief. the resolution that he will consider on wednesday is agreed-uponbe an top level by a racing the deficit within decades. opposeast years he will and overhaul medicare and medicaid that has become a lightning rod. the top republican on the budget committee, he has publicly said that he wants to take over ways and means next year. this morning, mary barra this will testify before the house energy and commerce

committee. this is the first of several days of testimony for mary barra. we will have that life for you beginning today on c-span three. we will look for your comments as well on our facebook page. writing about that story, the hill has some testimony ahead of this afternoon's hearing. she said that as soon as they learned about the problem, they acted without hesitation. they did sod that because whenever mistakes were made in the past, that they would not sure from sponsor abilities now or in the future. fromrt -- shirk responsibilities now and in the future. is from "the hill,". is that --," the hearing is this afternoon. next up, speaking on mental

health awareness in mental health of let -- mental health awareness last year, the senator's son attack him before committing suicide. he had a psych evaluation at the bath community hospital but was denied inpatient treatment. he is now looking to improve mental health care in virginia. he spoke to the national press club for about one hour. here because of unspeakable personal tragedy. he was seriously wounded in after theyis son attempted unsuccessfully to get health care for his son only to by a system that told him that there were no beds for care. the senator has recovered from his physical wounds and led the

virginia legislature to enact mental health legislation, adding millions of dollars to prevent another family from experiencing a tragedy like his did. the measure extends the amount of time that a mentally help -- mentally ill person can be held, unlike what happened with the senator's son. before making mental health his signature issue, the senator was known for allowing public access to the virginia sex offender registry. he was elected to the house of delegates in virginia in 1991 and left the house in 2001 to join the state senate. he was the democratic nominee for governor in 2009. please help me give a warm, national press club welcome to virginia state senator creed deeds. creigh [applause]

>> please, please. thank you for that generous introduction. wave -- my wife gave us this for her birthday. [applause] i want to acknowledge so many friends and members of my extended political family. i appreciate your being here and for giving me support. scare some ofight you. i will do the best i can. thank you for allowing me to speak about a critically important public issue. of the the warning signs system failure and despite the fact that as many as one out of four americans suffer from some

form of mental illness, mental health is working the set-aside in our public policy discussions and privacy conversations as well. when i spoke before the , boo radleyirginia was cited as a good analogy for the way that we deal in the society. out of sight, out of mind. it is about the success and failures of our mental health services. my purpose is not to rehash what happened last year. i will not talk about those specific events in anything more than a passing reference. it is much different and bigger than any individual experience. likewise, i will answer no questions about those days. when i decided to be open and public about my family's tragedy, i have three broad goals in mind. i wanted to work to destigmatize mental illness and bring about

equity in mental health. second, i wanted to use the experience to make it less likely that others would undergo similar heartbreak. third, i wanted to make sure that my son is remembered more for his living than his dying. i have organized this talk around those three points. my son was my hero. gus deeds was born on may 6, 1989. he was named creigh, but called gus. from the beginning gus was bright and a little small for his age. he did not grow until average size until he was a senior. as he grew he would take volumes of the encyclopedia to bed to read. he amazed everyone at church, reciting the lord's prayer from

memory before starting school. in elementary school he excelled at everything. he holds the record for the most perfect standardized test sol scores in bath county. he tore through a drum kit at age 7. he taught himself to play harmonica, piano, mandolin, and practically any other instrument. he wrote songs and performed throughout the area. gus could learn any language. he mastered spanish and could explain the differences among the various latin american dialects. he could lecture you on the origins of languages. he was learning arabic and cantonese.

he had an interest in gaelic history. he was athletic, played soccer. he started as a freshman for the bath county soccer team. he won numerous awards as a member of the high school band. he was valedictorian of his class. he was witty. he had everything going for him. at an early age he knew how to bait a hook and build a fire. he loved the woods in the garden. he spent many summers in a nature camp in vesuvius, virginia. he helped at camp poppy. he developed lifelong friendships and a deep appreciation to the outdoors and our natural resources for these

camps. at an early age he developed an intense religious interest. at the age of 20 on a one-man trip across the country, he was born again. that renewed his interest that his family came to accept. when he returned, gus and our family embarked on a new journey. our family's experience with the mental health experience is a demonstration of the problems we as a society have in dealing with the issue. neither his mother nor i wanted to accept the fact at our son was sick. in 2010, after we divorced, gus was living with his mother. she was concerned about his fixation on what he was making in the shed. i talked him into letting me hold the knife for him. he worked at a park, but returned home. we still do not know what happened out there. that fall gus' mom arrange for him to enter a crisis intervention center near charlottesville. he stayed for a week or two. i cannot believe my son was talking this way.

he was my child, but also an adult and i was not privy to any information about his diagnosis or medication. when he came home i helped him obtain a job. he spent the winter washing dishes. my brilliant son was a dishwasher, but he was happy. the next year gus left the job and then came to live with me. his behavior was more erratic. he talked about suicide. i went to the magistrate and had him committed. later we went through the process again. both times gus was released from the hospital with medication and put under the care of a psychiatrist. at no time was i ever able to talk with a psychiatrist or get an accounting or even an undetailed accounting of what his problems were. a psychologist or social worker

at the second hospital told me gus was bipolar, but not a classic case. he said the medication gus was on would be reduced. i kept hoping that gus would be all right. he was not his old self when he got out of the hospital the second time, but he seemed more stable while on medication. he kept appointments with a psychiatrist and made plans to return to william and mary. i began to relax. the summer of 2012 gus returned to the nature camp. he continued to abide by his appointments and go to the camp, and he managed his medication. he returned to school in 2012 and made the dean's list. that fall he brought a friend

home because the boy had nowhere else to go during the break. christmas was uneventful. gus went back to william and mary in january. i went to a pharmacy to refill his medication and left him with a prescription card and trusted him to keep it filled. some time in 2013 gus stopped taking his medicine. when he returned home, while his grades continued to be good, his behavior and attitude had changed. he went back to nature camp last summer, and even in his illness his heart was always evident. he was known at camp last summer for his kindness to homesick campers. he always had time for lonely strangers. he was the guy who would always give the people on the street looking for a dime a dime. he was a good samaritan. as parents we continue to

believe we could get our son back. that illness which had never been fully explained, at least not to me, had not taken over and that gus would be able to lead a productive life. friends and family a assured me he would grow out of it. what about mental illness? likewise, we as a society long to find treatment for physical illnesses such as cancer or heart disease, alzheimer's, we also look for cures and treatment, but what about mental illness? as a society we treat mental illness so differently than others. not only are we embarrassed by

it, we act as if the nervous system and brain are not parts of the body. if my son had cancer or heart disease, we would have known what to do and we would have known how to pay for it. with mental illness there is no assurance. two generations ago we began the process of institutionalizing the mentally ill. we decided we could save money and protect civil rights by providing care in communities. some of our instincts were good. our implementation has been a failure. men and women with mental illness are still in jails and prisons. we never adequately funded a system of treatment. the result is that the community service boards virginia have spent so much focus looking for money that the urgency for care is lost. not only is there a lack of equity in insurance payments, there is a desperate lack of services in some parts of the country. across the river from this building is one of the most affluent parts of virginia. there are many other regions

where unemployment is high and people are poor. graduate students who finish school with hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt are not likely to want to practice in those areas. they want to go where they can make enough money to live well, and who can blame them? those who complete the requirement for psychiatrists do not talk to rural virginia. not only is it impossible to pay for psychiatric care, but in many places the care is not available. last november as i tried to put my arms around my new reality i began to wonder about the law and how to effect change, real change. i decided on a two-pronged approach. first, to improve the crisis intervention process. we have a two-step process. if a loved one is in crisis, you can't petition for an emergency order. law enforcement will detain the

individual to obtain a mental health evaluation. as soon as the order is served it can be extended for another two hours. if the person is deemed to be a danger to himself or others the evaluator obtains a 48-hour detention order. several changes seemed obvious. the professional conducting the evaluation needs more time to make that evaluation. the evaluator needs better tools for identifying possible placement rather than having to call each facility, and limited bed space should not result in a person in crisis being denied treatment. think about it. under existing law, the magistrate cannot issue a temporary detention order even if that person meets the criteria until a bed has been identified. that makes absolutely no sense. an emergency room cannot turn away a person in cardiac arrest because the er is full. a police officer does not wait to arrest a murder suspect until jail space is identified. when a crisis emerges, our systems respond to protect individuals in the community.

why should a mental health crisis be different? the changes we made to that process are simple, and i saw george barker here. first, we added a requirement to law enforcement to notify the local mental health agency tasked with completing the evaluation, the community service boards upon execution of a custody order. hours may pass before an evaluator -- that lack of notice is a tragic flaw in existing law allowing precious time in a life-or-death system to be lost. we mandated a real-time psychiatric bed registry be developed and be immediately used. it will go forward now. an early version of the registry went online earlier this month. the registry will need to be updated to provide real-time

information. the evaluator will no longer waste time calling each facility looking for a bed. third, we have lengthened the evaluation time to eight hours, particularly in rural areas. we required revision of a state law that if a bed cannot be identified at the end of eight hours, there is an additional four hours to find an appropriate facility. what all that means is a person determined to be in the services will have a bed at the end of eight hours. every one of the situation is life and death in this critical change will save lives. among other changes we made we extended the temporary detention order to 72 hours. this will ensure there is time to properly begin treating and stabilizing the individual. after 72 hours, if additional treatment is needed, a hearing can be held and the person can be committed. these changes were described as modest, and i would agree, but they are significant changes to the front end of the crisis

intervention process, and i'm convinced they will save lives. the second prong is based that there are organic problems in virginia's systems for delivery of mental health care services. fixes will not come quickly. in the past small legislative victories diffused the pressure for change in the sense of urgency. even the degree of success, people lose focus despite the problems that remain. i hope that will not be the case this time. when i went to the general assembly this past january, it had been six weeks since the incident and the first time i was publicly visible. there were many people, some of whom are my friends, who were shocked and some even relieved by my appearance. nobody lost sight of our needs in mental health. i promise you that i have not lost my focus or sense of urgency. now the real work begins. we had the easy things. we have addressed failures in the process that my situation exposed. i'm not saying my situation occurred because of flaws in the law. i believe what my family went through in november and

continues endure could be prevented. we want to ensure that families with similar circumstances will not suffer as mine did. i know we prevented future tragedies, but we have so much more work to do. while the legislation -- addressing intervention, the most significant legislation passed was a study resolution. government is also ridiculed for studying things to death. the virginia legislature has avoided them in recent years. this year we made case that our mental health system has such problems that a comprehensive examination was needed to develop solutions, some of which will be difficult to reach and some which may be expensive. a senate resolution requires the

legislative body examine our mental health care delivery system. out of that process i am committed to making improvements to ensure the efficient delivery of services in every corner of the commonwealth to provide adequate funding. we can start by reviewing the reports prepared by our inspector general. one study exposed the system has a shortage in psychiatric beds because the hospitals are slow to release patients. the study will serve as a way to

keep mental health policy at the forefront of our discussions in virginia him and i hope the end result can be a model for other states. in the beginning of this study, my mind is completely open. there are no sacred cows than the current system. everything is on the table. i do not agree with the argument that we just need to spend money. nothing about my experience with the system in virginia inspires confidence. i am reminded of the biblical story of esther. when she was faced with a moral dilemma that would require her to put her life at risk, she

saved her people, the jewish people. she acted in response to the question -- who knows but that you have come to your position for a time such as this? i'm not suggesting my situation is as grave, but through the loss of my son, i was face to face with deficiencies that our legislators created. i could either be lost in my grief or i could act. i chose to act. one of the most heartrending responses to my tragedy have been the letters and e-mails and facebook messages from people all over the country who have gone through similar tragedies. i remember the state legislature, and my name might not be the easiest name, but i am well known.

if this could happen to me and my family, going under significant amount of media attention, the reality is that people die and are hurt frequently in similar circumstances. some of the worst strategies we have seen in this country have been because of people with mental illness have not received proper treatment. i survived. i hope the result of my survival is that my son is remembered for his living and not for his dying, that we improve our laws and prevent further tragedies and we finally destigmatize mental illness. virginia has the opportunity to lead. we cannot afford to pass up this chance. we have a lot of work to do, and over to the memories of my son and other parents, siblings, and friends, to be successful. thank you. >> thank you, senator. you talked about how this is not something that is a one-time issue that can be solved with one action or one piece of

legislation. what can be done to keep mental health issues at the forefront of lawmakers' minds in subsequent years and in the general public? >> as i said, this past session there were some people who did >> thank you, senator. you talked about how this is not something that is a one-time issue that can be solved with one action or one piece of legislation. what can be done to keep mental health issues at the forefront of lawmakers' minds in subsequent years and in the general public? >> as i said, this past session there were some people who did

not think i was going to show up. these guys had supported me all these years, they knew i would show up, but there were people who thought i would show not show up. when i showed up every day, red eye, red face, that kept the people in the forefront, but we got the study commissions created, and we have a strong commission that will be for four years and it has bipartisan

support. my scars are not going away. i can tell you that as long as i am there -- and there are others that are going to make sure it stays there, at least in virginia -- it is just amazing the number of requests i get to speak all over the place. this is an issue not just in virginia, but all over the country. a lot of people are going to the watching what we do in virginia. when i was trying to get this passed, the problem with passing study resolutions has been the majority in the house of delegates. i went to the speaker and the chairman of the appropriations committee, both of whom i have known for a long time, and i looked them in the eye, and they were behind what we are doing. they understand we might be doing something very important in virginia and we might spend a

lot of money to fix the situation. but i can tell you that it takes determination. we have an opportunity in virginia to lead, and hopefully we are going to. >> does the legislation go far enough, or is it a first step or an incremental step to something else? >> last november, i was in a hospital bed trying to think about what we can do, and believe me, i am not done. in terms of legislation, i knew what we had to do was addressed the crisis intervention piece. that is just incremental, because that is the part that clearly broke down. in my situation. we could find ways to address that and honestly they were not all my ideas. george barker and others were involved in developing those ideas, democrats and republicans. i believe there are bigger problems than our system, and our system is not unique. bigger problems in systems all over the country. that is why i pushed the study resolution. this was an incremental change. we changed an important piece of

the mental health care picture in virginia, but the real work lies ahead. we have to reform the system, and we will be a failure unless we have the review. you have to use this opportunity of the study resolution to spend four years looking very hard, very intensely at the virginia process, to see what works and what does not, and we have to come back with changes over the next years. in virginia at least it is incremental, the change we have passed. does it go far enough? i think we changed what we could change this year. politics -- government is a compromise and it is about accomplishment of what you can. it is not about what you wish. it is about what you can do. we are going to do more down the road. [applause] >> what about next year? are you planning to wait for the result of the commission's work or do you plan on more legislation on this topic next year? >> the resolution calls for a report at the end of the two years -- i guess in 2015 and

2017. we will have legislation in 2016 and 2018. if good ideas spring up before then, we will introduce it. my goal is to remake the system into a system that works for every part of virginia. we might already have it in place. i don't know, but i won't know until we conduct a study. the plan right now calls for legislation in 2016 and 2018. if good ideas come up then, we will go forward. >> can you comment on the handling of the ig investigation given the concerns that were voiced last week by the author of that report? >> i met with him the week after i got out of the hospital. i found him to be compassionate, knowledgeable, and determined to get to the bottom of the situation. also, once i found out about this 2012 report -- i am embarrassed to say i didn't know he made a report in 2012 that would've addressed many of the issues that were exposed in my incident.

i have looked at that report. i talked after he resigned in early march or late february. i met with the inspector general and he sure to me that the only differences of opinion about some of the opinions is that he was only changing adjectives. he told me all the recommendations would go forward. the inspector general is a retired fbi guy. i have faith in law-enforcement. i think his comments but an exclamation mark after the inspector general's report and makes clear we have big problems in our mental health system. i wish we had the results of the inspector general's report prior to the passage of all the legislation because that would've enforced a lot of what

we were trying to do and perhaps allow us to go a step or two for further -- two further. >> the investigator resigned in protest saying the findings of that report were censored. were you concerned with the contents of that report? >> i am ok with it. there were other investigations as well. the state police conducted a pretty thorough investigation. i think the inspector general's report is consistent with the findings. i think he probably would've

taken it a step further but i am not -- i don't know that his signings -- i don't know that the inspector general's findings are inconsistent with this police report. i think it is all out there. i am not that concerned. >> one of the things the report recommends is a decentralizing through virginia department of behavior health into a regional authority. do you think that more authority on mental health treatment in virginia should move away from richmond? >> i am one of those guys that believes the government closest to the people is the best, the most responsive. i think that would be an idea that some would say before the study commission. we have not even started the work of the study commission so it is premature to say that any approach is going to be taken. >> now that you have seen in the

findings in the report, do you blame any individuals or organizations for possible failures or do you think what happened is representative of a larger problem with mental health care in virginia or in the nation? >> some things i'm just not going to talk about. i think what happened was a system failure. it is both people at fault, organizations that fault, but it is representative of what can happen anywhere else. and what does happen in other places. that doesn't leave individuals a position to do something for their actions. >> what would your opinion of virginia's mental health system prior to your involvement with it with your son was the need to reform clear only once you got a close up view? or was it something you paid attention to before that? >> that is a great question.

as legislators, my primary connection to the mental health system was folks from the csb who came to me that they needed more money and funding. i visited with the community service board. i have gotten many functions for various areas that are represented. it wasn't something that was at the top of my agenda. my son, for the last three years of his life, were pretty difficult. i was in constant contact because when your children are over 18, you can make them go to the doctor. you can't make them take their drugs. you can make the return phone calls or keep appointments. i was in constant contact with the csb folks or with -- i was in contact with him. i cannot tell you that reform was on my mind before all of

this occurred. the only issue that only came to me was that we need more money from the csb. i want to point out -- i think there are csbs in our state that function very well. the ones a function the best are the ones that get a lot of funding from the local government. we don't do a good job of funding csbs in virginia but that doesn't excuse everything, what happened to my son. [applause] >> a couple of questions on patient privacy and family access to information that you referred to a couple of times -- what changes would you propose in confidentiality laws regarding mental health professionals communicating with

the families of the people they are serving? >> it is very difficult for me to talk about that at the state level because we are guided by the federal law. there is very little we can do at the state level to undercut it. if i were the came and changing things on a big scale, i might reform hipaa. young people with certain mental illnesses have a curve between the ages of 18 and 35. perhaps parents need to be more involved in those years. sometimes the only thing you know about it is the bill that comes in that have to be paid. you are welcome to pay the bill but not know what's going on with your kid. your kid might be 25 or 35 years old but they are still your kid. that is very difficult. i would probably make major changes at the federal level but i am not at the federal level and i have no desire to be. [laughter] >> we have had campaign

announcements made at the podium before. on that topic, in addition to hipa, what will be the best thing the federal government would do to improve the nation's mental health system? >> i don't know that i am prepared to answer a question like that. i am not really encouraged too much productive work occurs. [laughter] >> you talked about the practice of denying patients who are in need of care or a bed in care. should there be a zero-tolerance policy for those that may pose a

danger to themselves or others? >> there should be. that is what we did in virginia this year. the point i was trying to make was that when a crisis occurs with a bank robber or him or her running down the street, you don't stop the guy and say, let me see if i could find a jail cell for you. we put them in jail. this shouldn't be a difference between what you do in a mental health crisis. the comments i made about washington -- i don't want to be derogatory. let me tell you about marion.

in 1964 and 1965, when congress really did things that mattered, the voting rights act and the silver rights act, there was one congressman in virginia that voted for those. he wasn't from fairfax county or arlington. he wasn't in loudoun, norfolk, richmond. he was from marion, virginia. marion is in another world probably. it is southwest virginia. her father who was the congressman was the last congressman -- i would suggest that it took heroic votes to make a difference in this country. he paid for it.

pat jennings was his name. [applause] >> in addition to the problem of patients being denied care in the first place, what do you have to say about hospitals dragging patients with a serious mental illness when they still need care? >> that -- that is a big issue. my son was hospitalized twice and both times -- when he was first hospitalized, i visited him and he was under the 48 hour order. he said this is where he needed to be and i realize it now. about six weeks later, we were back in the same situation. he was released within the 48 hours and we had a problem. we took -- by the time we went to the next hospital. he was one of the smartest people i met and he could figure things out.

there was no psychiatrist or psychologist he couldn't talk out of or into whatever he wanted to do. he knew what answers to give. that was one of the reasons we changed 48 hours in virginia, to give people more time. in the long term, i don't know, i think one problem that we have to address in the study group is while we are focused on crisis intervention, what do we do long-term? how do we provide for people long-term? with my son, the plan was -- this broke our hearts. i have spent the last three years of my sons life worried that he would end up homeless or in prison. that is not such a bad option now. the plan once he got committed was to end up with a long-term place in a state hospital. that is a tough thing to think about. we are going to be looking at long-term care. we are going to be looking at how we make sure that people are not released until they are

ready to be released. i don't know the answers right now. >> we hear a lot about the need for improved mental health system and improve access to it. what is your message for people within that system? what can they do as individuals to improve the system in which they work? >> stay focused on the patients. stay focused on -- every situation is a life or death situation. the public system of mental health, every system is life or death. my experience has been that too often people are pretty cavalier about the situations they are in. oftentimes, they are not. do your job. i don't have an answer that is fit for c-span. [laughter] >> given that many advocates want to play down the possibility of violence with people and mental illnesses, what other changes should be made in educating families about

the possibility of violence? >> part of the problem with mental health, as i indicated, for most of us, it is out of sight and out of mind. i think we need to think about mental illness. we need to think about what to look for in our young people. we need to think about how to deal with it. my son had this thing with knives. he made a lot of knives, but there was never any indication that he was going to be violent. i never sent the violence on my son's part. i know that my former wife was concerned about it. i never felt there was a threat of violence with gus. i think that -- we can really begin to address the possibility of violence, we need to be honest about mental illness.

we need to understand it is like cancer. it is in every family. it is either within your family or within your circle of friends. somebody know is suffering, whether it is addiction or depression or something more severe. once we start to deal with honestly and openly with mental health issues then we can think about violence. in my circumstance, there was never -- i never felt afraid. i never felt afraid. i don't know how to answer that question properly. >> you talked about how the age of onset is usually on young adults. how do you think access to care could be improved for young people who are new to their

mental illness and it will not accept or even recognize that they are ill? >> that is very difficult. that is the exact circumstance i was in. my son was 20 years old before there was ever a sign. the only thing i could do was go to a magistrate and have my son hospitalized. that is one thing we have to look at in our study. candidly, the bigger issue is what can we do under federal law? what can you do with someone who was unwilling to be treated? that -- i don't know what the answer to that is either. >> what advice do half her parents who may fear their child is suffering of a mental illness? >> love your children. love your children and do whatever it takes to protect them even if that hurts you. nobody wants to believe that their children, their precious children are sick. no one wants to believe that -- to think of cancer or physical illness, that is bad but to think of a mental illness that might not be fixable is tough. all you can do is protect your

children and love them. >> you talked about returning to the virginia statehouse after your tragedy and how hard that was. tell us what with the best and worst things your colleagues did or said to you and what advice would you give to others and how to approach someone who has been through a tragedy such as years -- yours? >> everybody is different. everybody approaches these things differently and you never know how to respond. with me, people in richmond, or at least my colleagues were fair and honest. they know me. they know i am kind of quiet and pretty shy and i like to be left alone. that is under the best of

circumstances. this time, i really wanted to be alone. people that know me -- the 23rd year i have been in richmond and generally, my doors open and anybody that wants to visit with me have a chance to visit with me. i see constituents or different people all day long all session. this year my door was shut. i didn't visit with people. even good friends would come by and visit with me and say, are you kidding? i would say no. there were some lobbyist that continue to press me and continue to hound me. that bothered me. people didn't -- people that respect my privacy, that bothered me a lot. most people did. most people just kind of left me alone because that is where i wanted to be. i told people -- somebody texted me about i haven't visited with

a local group of people that i represent. i just texted back, i'm here to do my job, that is all i can do. frankly, what zell miller wrote, he never needed a psychiatrist. i promised shavon after this happened that i would find somebody to talk to. the work was the best therapy i had. i couldn't imagine before -- i was sweating and scared to death to go back because that would have to be in front of people but now i can do that. >> you told us about the online, real-time registry and it is in a test phase. tell us about how that works and when does the next step of that registry come to fruition? >> we will see. it has been in the works since about 2009 or 2010.

the department of behavioral health says they were cut out from under them. they were able to establish it. i have no doubt that funding has been cut. with everything that is on the internet these days, it seems to me that a kid -- my kids could've set up a real-time registry. what they got now is not real-time. we have looked a different things. it is updated every day or updated every day right now, i think. it is just went online in the first of the month. it will take a little more time to develop. the reality -- right now, when a

worker or evaluator goes in, they have to call through to the hospitals. this registry will not mean that they have to make those calls because they still will to make sure the bed is still available. the real-time might be 35 minutes ago. it will tell them which hospital's not available because it will tell them what hospitals do not have beds. that will save time. when you are dealing with the emergency custody order. whether it is four hours or eight hours under the new law, it is still a limited amount of time. you got those precious seconds ticking away. this real-time registry, i am convinced will be very helpful. >> you talked a lot about access. what about the treatment itself? have you talked to

pharmaceutical companies about new drugs? is there anything you see that could be done to create incentives at the state level? >> i am all ears. if there are things we can do, but talk about it. my son, i remember he talked about how the drugs heard him, physically hurt him. i heard that from other people, too. i don't know enough about the medications and i don't know enough about the research. if there are things we can do at the state level, i am all ears. i think it is going to take a bigger push. that is probably something that could happen at the federal level. there could be more incentives built in for the development of pharmaceuticals. >> what about the insurance side of things? the mental health parity act was

passed a few years ago and now today is the obamacare sign-up deadline. do you think there is enough access to parity for mental health treatment in certain systems now and our insurance system now? >> i don't think so. one of the achievements of the affordable care act is there is parity. if we pass a form of medicaid expansion in virginia, that would immediately open up about $200 million a year for people that are mentally ill. people that are in that stage of medicaid expansion would have better access to mental health care. we don't have enough equity. the problem with the parity law is that it has not brought about parity. the affordable care act does so that is significant. [applause] >> we have a couple of questions about veterans. we've had some speakers here at the press club talk about veterans' need for mental health care. do you think that is something that should be done in the efforts you're working on in virginia or is there anything

specific you are looking at for veterans? >> it is not something specific i am looking at. honestly, when you think about -- people have come home from war for forever. they see unspeakable things. they go through unspeakable events that thankfully most people don't have to endure. it is impossible not to be affected by that. a normal human being, not to be affected by that. we have to focus on mental health care for veterans. that is not something specifically that is part of the study, but that is certainly something we will be looking at in terms of what we can do at the state level. >> we are almost out of time before i ask you the final question, i have a couple of housekeeping matters to take care of. i would like to remind you about

our upcoming speakers on april 2. we have the commissioner of the u.s. internal revenue service. on april 14, lewis black, the comedian, with discussed politics and social issues. on april 23, general mark welsh will be here. second, i would like to present senator deeds with a traditional coffee mug. [applause] and for the final question, you told us a lot about gus. can you tell us one more untold story that you would like people to know about your son? >> my son was as an ordinary kid except he had extraordinary ability in many respects. when he was a little boy, this is probably about well, 1995 -- he was six years old and he would travel with me. his sisters and his mother would call it that he would take one for the team.

he would travel with me on my journeys and i shared this thing called the blue ridge economic development commission. he sat for three hours one afternoon in a corner at the squire center at virginia tech while we conducted our meeting. i was chair and he sat there playing with trucks and a little mini garage. a couple years before that, the whole family was at a ballgame in norfolk. the ballpark had just been built and we were out in left field and gus was about -- that was 1993 so he was about four. he was sitting across the picnic table from me and he looked at these two little kids rolling around fighting. he said, dad, those boys are doing what i would like to do --

they are fighting. i said, yes, gus. i took another bite of my hamburger and he was gone. [laughter] he was ordinary in every sense of the word until he was about 20 years old. we finished our gubernatorial campaign and he had some time on his hands and decided to be mentally ill. that was a joke. he didn't decide. he had this unbelievably sweet nature that was apparent and evident up until the end. he was a great kid. [applause]

>> thank you, senator deeds. thank you to our audience for coming today. also like to thank our national press club staff including our journalism into two for helping organize today's event. here is a reminder. you can find more information on our website. if you would like a copy of today's program, you can find it there as well at www.press.org. thank you. we are adjourned. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] an hour the u.s. house will begin its legislative week. today they have a couple of bills involving the ukraine and

sanctions against russia. live coverage of the house, here on c-span. the senate intelligence committee has a report stating that the senate intelligence ciaittee concludes that the misled the government and public about the aspects of his brutal -- it's brutal interrogation program for years. the department of justice and eventually congress is going to get unique and otherwise plots and save thousands of lives. thatone u.s. official, was actually true, the post right know. on capitol hill later today, the general motors ceo goes before house energy and commerce committee. it's the first of several days of testimony about the recall of over 4 million gm vehicles with ignition problems. 2:00 p.m. eastern on c-span3.

next up, a forum on u.s.-chinese relationship focusing on china's economy and the relations between the two countries. this is from the brookings institution. it's about one hour. >> hello, everyone. i feel honored to host this session of the u.s.-china relationship to commemorate the 35th anniversary. i am the host of the dialogue on cctv news. the history of our relationship goes back to the mid-19th century. the u.s. demanded an open door policy and equal access to the chinese market. the first generation of chinese students returned thanks to the humiliating indemnity.

the process of the china modernization started from our devastating defeat at almost the same time, and even going back to the tong honesty, when policies were very liberal for public opinions. today, china has become the fastest-growing overseas market of the u.s., we are the top creditor. when we look at the commonwealth, we got to examine the growing independence -- interdependence on the growing world, and we look to see if a rising power could challenge and antagonize u.s. world leadership. do we have a collective future based on the norms of a new model of major power relations questions to address these and other issues, i am pleased to be joined in the panel discussion from the center of american progress. mr. peter, from the university

of oklahoma. to ever coming. >> thank you. >> i know your mandarin is better than my english. [laughter] >> and from the national development reform mission. my very first question is about why millions from the west repeat the same question, a communist regime could run a successful economy -- according to the classical theory in political science of the west, only a combination of a liberal democracy with a liberal market economy could enable the success of a major economy like china.

how could the communist regime get this done? my first question goes to the lady at the other end of the spectrum. >> i have prepared a remark about the u.s.-china but now, it it comes with me. it is a challenge for me to answer the question in just a few minutes, and a big album for me, but i will try my best. >> if you cannot try english efficiently, i can be your translator. speak your mother tongue. >> for a long time, i had no speaking english, but i want to

speak english to impress. about china, i think he is [indiscernible] in my opinion, there are opinions about how to define china's economy mode. i want to say globalization is the most important.

i can, for example, china has become the largest provider of the u.s. import, and the second largest export market from the u.s. air meanwhile -- u.s.. meanwhile, it is the second-largest resource. i think china [indiscernible] i think i want to define it as a consumption mode. it is the most important part of

the u.s. economy. what i want to say -- another idea is after 30 years, over the past 30 years, the united states has become the largest in debtor nation, and at the same time china being the largest u.s. creditor. china and the u.s. have a pattern for each other. >> you're not answering my question about why a communist regime. arouse such a successful economy -- could all rivals such a successful economy. we relied on manufacturing, very cheap extraction of raw materials, but i would like to have a perspective from the

americans as to whether you are surprised, if not shocked as to why one -- a one-party system could fully to realize entrepreneurship and fully outbid some major economies in the world? it is a big story, but it seems china is not able to tell the story. am i correct, or do you think we are subject to self inflation? >> i think we should separate communist regime from single-party regime. we heard that mao had previously considered calling the chinese communist party something then -- other than communist party because it is a loaded term, what the communist party was trying to do was what was best for china economically at the time as they saw it, and that has changed over the years. wanting the communist party has proven they could do very well is change and innovate to fit current times.

when they needed agrarian reform, that is one -- what they focused on. when china most needed was opening up the market, that is what they did. we are now in the point in time with the big question is whether the chinese communist party can do what they need to do next, what they have promised to do and taken on as their big job for the term, actually shift toward a more law-based, decentralized regulatory economy that can not only provide exports for the rest of the world, but also increase domestic consumption, bring the chinese citizens out the last wrong on living standards, and support a real innovation economy. i think they have been able to make it to this point as far because they have not been stuck on the old communist model. they have been willing to innovate up to the very edge of what they think they can do

while maintaining the single party system. that is why you see so many young people fascinated with china today because it is a day by day change and a day by day struggle, and all of us are literally on the edge of our seats waiting to see if they will succeed again for the next round. >> people are looking at the mode of chinese development, whether why we have been able to survive the first few years of a shock as opposed to adopting the shock therapy of the former, or late russian president morsi elson. i would like to give the floor to my chinese colleague here. >> i would like to provide maybe a different perspective from my expertise in foreign affairs dimensions for why i am optimistic about the future development of china's economy and why it has achieved such an economic boom in the past few decades.

we know a government must provide good governance, and one of the features is efficiency. i think the chinese government can provide very efficient and very good implementation of the decision that has been made by the central government, and i think it can be good to open up to the world. there was a lot of opposition in china. then we opened up, and then we see what we have achieved. also, in the past few decades, china has been out by foreign trade negotiations, including fta. we know how difficult it is for the united states to negotiate, bargain and reach a different kind of fta, including issues between china and the u.s. and

nafta. when we could guarantee once the bargaining finishes, he will be passed and can be taken into affect. look at the united states. we know the resident must get the trade authorization from the congress, -- president must get the trade authorization from the congress. so, we can see from this perspective china government can really provide strong dynamics for the past decades that have proven very successful exportation-oriented development. >> we have a lot to thank and the american friends, not only for establishing a dramatic

relationship in 1979, during the carter administration, and is earth day happens to be october 1, our national day -- birthday happens to be october 1, our national day. we also think president clinton. that is very helpful other than the landmark entry in 2001 that helps china enjoy the frog leap when we entered into the wto, when 9/11 took place. you are pushing back terrorism, and you enjoy economic development. many go back to the sensitive issue of ideology. i would like to go back to the first question. president bush senior said if

you can change the name of your ruling party, the image of china would be a lot better. i wonder if that is still the way americans still perceive the image of china. >> yes, i think that is absolutely right. for most americans, one of the first things that comes to mind when asked about china is communism, and as a country that is, sort of, a successor to the enlightenment tradition in europe, big l liberalism, defense of liberty and freedom, being central to our understanding of who we are, communism is scary, and that is precisely why people like yao ming are so important because they create an image for china that is not about the chinese government, which is fearful for any freedom-loving american because of the communism, but yao allows us to think about the

chinese people, and the erican people actually have a positive image of the chinese people, and one of the reasons for that is people like yao ming. and people also like r&b, the chinese u.n., it -- chinese yuan, a gets the ball rolling. now, i would like to invite my chinese friend -- how you look at the international manipulation of the 3m the -- current seat. you think this is one of the major hurdles that prevents the u.s. from adopting a free trade

and politicians tend to have protectionism in times of economic crisis. is that true. [speaking mandarin]

>> [speaking mandarin] >> let me do a brief translation. some of the listeners -- she says that there is a limited margin for international legalization of renminbi according to research in this area. go ahead. >> [speaking mandarin]

[speaking mandarin] >> wait a minute. my memory is poor. [laughter] sorry. peter, if you could help. >> [speaking mandarin] [laughter] >> maybe i could. she says china needs to regionalize first, the renminbi, and must turn china from the biggest export state into one of the biggest import states.

>> renminbi [laughter] -->> [speaking mandarin] >> we should lay more emphasis on domestic consumption as opposed to turning to the pollution of the environment. i think enough has been said about the internet is --internationalization of renminbi. [speaking mandarin] there will be a single voice about the renminbi issue. there has been the deficit. the trust deficit is actually something that has undermined the healthy development of the most important bilateral relationship.

what are the fundamental reasons, do you think, behind the strategy mistrust between our two countries, peter? >> from the american perspective it is largely what we discussed earlier, which is the fear of communism and the fear of the loss of liberty that, i think, drives american perception of communist countries. on the chinese side, i think a major cause of distrust is a different ideology, and that is the nationalist ideology that is anti-imperialist, bound up in a narrative of the so-called century of humiliation, which depicts china has constantly humiliated by western and japanese powers. so, i think that leaves many chinese to view the united states, japan, other western countries through a prism that is a very defensive and

sensitive one, and that can contribute to mistrust, just like american liberalism can lead to distrust of communist or read -- red china. >> i said two thirds of americans live in the shadow of last century, and only another one-third could cast a new look at why china rises so quickly. i would like to have your comments on whether the label of ideology or not ideological lines should be employed in examining the new realities of china. i saw my friend waved his hand when peter delivered his perspective on why -- >> he was my teacher. >> then you are his poor student, i'm afraid. yes. >> we have managed to situation between the u.s. and china because we have never had two countries so dependent on one another yet have so very different political systems.

american policy has been basically come in many ways, trying to wait china out. the assumptions are that china will democratize eventually so we should have a short-term situation for the current regime, and looked toward the future when they will be just like us, and now we have hit the point where we realize they are very close to us in economic might, the coming very powerful, yet not just like us, so we will have to have a new way of dealing with that. from the chinese perspective, a beijing is rather smart and clever, and they have noticed the u.s. has these assumptions that eventually they will go away and we will be dealing with someone new and that dynamic does not breed long-term trust or set a good stage for long-term cooperation. i think we are reaching a brand-new stage in u.s.-china relations, particularly with the current generation of leaders, they have a new report with their american counterparts.

although i am young and have not seen much, it is not something i've seen before. i think it is different than what we have had in the past. i was lucky to be in a meeting with my boss and one young, where he was teasing us about american politics. it felt like we were dealing with someone back in washington. it did not feel like he was so different than someone across the political aisle here in town. we are finally reaching the point where we have a great rapport between, for example, jack lew and jong, who are moving past the old structure where it seemed like we were across a big ocean. now, there is the feeling that they are people we could do business with and we do not have to wait for china to change, maybe not change. there are a lot of things to do

under the current system, inc. are working well, so i am personally optimistic about the fact that ideology is not that big of a deal anymore for our grassroots-level cooperation. of course, there are issues and principles we must deal with, but we can do business in a way that we might have been able to do before. >> there is a diversity of opinions with two american sitting next to me with two views of how china should be examined. i would like to ask a simple question. zhejiang pain was invited to have a meeting without ties. unlike the gun salute, ceremonial reception on the south lawn of the white house, what the americans have done

before, how do you read into the symbol of it being informal so that, like the first lady's people-to-people diplomacy this time around in beijing, americans try very hard, and genuinely, sincerely, very hard to let people from both sides have a new feeling toward this new model of the major power relationship. >> first, it reflects the different styles of the leaders of china. xi is different. it also reflects the confidence of china in dealing with the united states had -- united states. third it is also written --, it is reflective of the two sides. maybe the most important thing is to discuss essential things as opposed to paying attention to the symbolic and ceremonial issues.

why the two size decided to spend such a long time to chat, discuss and establish mutual trust between themselves -- one of the reasons is the mutual mistrust between the two countries -- i disagree with peter. i do not think it is the so-called [indiscernible] rooted in the ideology conflict. i think it is rooted in the strategic interest conflict. china, for example, if china is a country who will support, you know, support the independence of alaska or hawaii, and sell

weapons to the pro--independence guys -- if china is a country that establishes missile or missile-defense systems in cuba and aligns with canada and mexico, will the united states have mutual trust with china? it is impossible. >> can i respond? >> go ahead, peter. >> you made my case for me. take the example of hawaii. i am oklahoma. say china decided to take texas from the united states. most do not have commercial interests in texas, yet all oklahomans and all americans would reject that, the angry, and fight over it, and not because of material interests, but because of symbolic

politics, self-esteem. i do not think we are disagreeing with one another in the sense that at one level you asked about trust and distrust. those are the things that are below the surface. so, regular day-to-day working relationships are very smooth and improving. i agree with your analysis. it is when you have issues that pushes beneath the surfaces is when you see there is a lack of mutual trust that undermines the stability of the relationship in times of crisis. if you care about u.s.-china relations, we need to be repaired for the next bombing, plane collision -- if you allow this trust to build up below the surface, we could have serious problems the next time that kind of thing happens. >> thank you very much. i would like to open the floor

to the audience. you are encouraged to ask questions. that gentleman -- that lady who raised her hand, who was the first to raise her hand. >> thank you for talking about u.s. china relationship in the global context. i like to bring in the picture, the regional and global north korea had a whole asian pacific, everyone. i am very interested in seeing u.s. and china relationships talk through and develop into

and i believe billions of chinese people are looking for that also. china turn to see into a democracy. when we talk about a global context, we want everybody to observe the rule of law. china had no ability to observe the rule of law in many aspects including the rule of law, manipulation of currency, the protection of its own market. that's the difference between communism and democracy. i'm asking all of you had to

move forward so china can observe the rule of law and we can develop a better trust and we can have a more stable and peaceful and global development, especially in the south east china sea. >> that is a lot of questions. aether china will become democracy, that reminds me of a book. what he says is in the book is that liberal democracy prevails with the collapse of the former soviet union. but what we saw today was so inh political chaos thailand, turkey, ukraine, egypt, and the sovereign debt crisis, a devastating financial meltdown in north america.

handseral democracy joins , that can turn -- then how can you explain the magical appeal of democracy for improving the ?ivelihoods of folks >> i would come to fukuyama posta femmes. i don't think he ever claimed democratization was easy. claimed thek he entire world would be democratic. there are no ideological challengers to the liberal capitalist system after the end of the cold war. had failed and he argued that communism had failed. large country. it is communist in name, but i teach my students that china is not communist in any other sense

, that it is a one-party dictatorship, people do not believe in communism. anthat sense, until there is alternative, a beijing model that has popular appeal, until that is the case, i think fukuyama is still right. this man believes what china does is practice communism. >> i just said it's not communism. impression -- >> in name only. >> the issue of rule of law, i think the first thing the government should do is provide better and better living conditions for the people. especially for developing countries. china's situation is much more different from the united states

and european countries. the first concern of ordinary people is that today we can have a stable life and tomorrow we can make more money to have a better life. law is a tool of for that purpose. democracy runs rather good. we all have a lot of troubles. i don't need to mention. it is a good example, but there are a lot of bad examples in the world. thosepeople living in so-called democratic countries, and our so-called will of law. the lives of ordinary people are poor. no one wants to live there, including the united states.

take china as a whole and the current situation into consideration when we try to push china to move to whatever directions. standard to judge what is good for the people, i think the chinese people maybe have a different view. >> other questions? >> i'm from china and

[indiscernible] >> freedom, liberty, and also democracy. aims. them are the documentsk at the including those published by the chinese government, those are aims.

we have some different definitions about that. in two countries are different development stages. oron't mean democracy liberty come a we are all looking forward to that and we hope it will be filled in china. currently, the most concerns or biggest concerns for us to maintain stability and achieve dragmic development to millions or hundreds of millions andeople out of poverty that is what we are looking for today. in the future, in the united states, chinese people, we share the same data.

>> i have a question regarding efficient quality. i agree that policy in china is efficient from a top-down policy, but we could say it has a dramatic impact on our society and environment. i'm wondering what kind of policy we can consider in the future and how we should evaluate our policy. not only for china but for the united states. balance thee quality of society? -- >> my colleagues for this whenrence complained a lot

we take the bus from our hotel to brookings. friends buy something -- chinaunited states has a lot of problems and we are facing a lot of difficulties, but for such a big country, legions of people, we are trying to catch up with those countries and you can now dream or push china to come up with all the that other countries are enjoying today. will facee government and deal with those dealing with dilution and corruption issues. but i may be a little more ,onfident than some of my peers

chinese or american friends, i am more optimistic about the process of the government. in the government decided to do something in china. bigger provide opportunity or possibility for china to fulfill something the central government has decided to do. >> just a few more points to add. all, we need to restructure the economy and power should be s and let thengo perhapslay a role and

on the demand side. also, the social security program will help to close the income gap between coastal areas and the hinterland of china. you name a lot of policy options for the chinese leadership and we look at the issue of sustainability. that is something i would like to add to. other than issues like transparency. that's something i'm looking that we canooking answer. >> this gentleman in the middle. >> i have a question for the two american scholars. napoleon once referred to china as the sleeping lion.

now it is peaceful, so just wonder what kind of image of -- or kunga to you fu panda or something like that? >> i think china needs to tell us what kind of rising country it is going to be. are used to having everyone be nervous anytime we take an action. explain what we are doing clearly so we can explain -- as china isg rising up and no longer becoming with greatlion,

power comes great responsibility. when the lion is next to you and is a way, you're going to be nervous was sure quite sure it's friendly. it's going to take a lot of work, chinese side to convey to other countries what its intentions are and to convey the souths issues in china sea. what does china mean? when you have a powerful military and you're not clear about what some of your border documents indicate, other countries are going to be very nervous and might react in ways that are not beneficial. as the u.s. tries to do a good job at being a responsible power that conveys things clearly, it's easy for us since we are a democracy and our fights are pretty public, it's going to be

harder because of the nature of china's political system but i hope the leaders in beijing can be innovative in solving that challenge. to return toke where we started us off with the question of economic and political development and the difficulty americans have had understanding the chinese model of economic development because i think this is related to the question of perceptions. i think you are right that americans assume liberties cohere. if you have economic reform, he must have democratic reform. a big reason why americans were so shocked by the events of 1989, and you have this move from panda to dragon. you see this constantly in the united states and this is a problem. china is neither a panda nor a dragon, yet we have this tendency to swing wildly back and forth because china does not fit our mental model.

butas had economic reform not political reform and we have a hard time squaring that. the united states needs to do a better job of seeing china for what it isn't which is neither panda nor dragon, but just another animal out there like we are. on china's side, and this applies to america as well. the united states and china as the two biggest child -- two biggest today, our citizens tend to take on a certain kind of narcissism. questions like this can actually be a little dangerous. chinese shouldn't care too much it is aamericans think panda or a dragon. they should just be confident that they are china and that should help a lot of things, just like americans should not be overly concerned about what

other people think of america. my question -- you take the floor freely. u.s., if you look at the lingering impact with the five military alliances of japan, australia, south korea -- you're held hostage if you look at the bilateral relationship between the prc and the u.s.. it seems the rise of the right wing in japanese politics has scared policy makers on both sides across the aisle, u.s. and china. if they want to give their lifting the cork in the bottle and getting rid of the us-japan chip 38 accord.

-- security accord. are you concerned by this security scenario? who will be the first to take my question. >> i think it's not a direct conflict of material interests. tradek if there are issues, security issues, the united states and china are likely to find positive outcomes danger isthe real getting sucked into a conflict with china and -- china and japan or china and taiwan. aboutuld care very much the taiwan issue. >> what about the issue of women. that has a lot to do with northeast asia and south korea.

feels --dent [indiscernible] what do you think of this issue ofa woman and a scholar international studies? >> if you compare the recovery in europe in the aftermath of world war ii versus the recovery and lingering tensions and eight -- in asia, we can see clearly whenever we are open and honest about what happened in history and make the apologies that need to be made to victimize hearties, both sides can move forward. when we try to hide or suppress information about what many people know to be true, what happened during world war ii, those resentments linger and faster and can resurface again and again. thed on the comparisons strides the european union has

made and these controversies in asia, in my opinion, the only way forward is for there to be a much more straightforward there wereent that comfort women in world war ii and that's something there should be apologize for and they should be honored as victims of world war ii just as soldiers were fighting on the battlefield. that openness is going to be crucial toward moving toward a more balanced relationship. for the news cycle, the tensions in the sea, there are different perceptions for that. chinese, we have always been blamed by the united states and its allies. addition of the island, we will not have that tension. opposeddes, chinese has

to wait for the next generation and the next generation to resolve it. look at what japan is doing and after the nationalization of the paying homage to the toine, that tape public way acknowledge the emperor and some to refuse or even -- it makes china for the south -- it was adopted in 1947.

before. years -- just lookes back into history. 1898 some of the united states and spain signed the paris treaty and two years later , 1900, the u.s. and spain signed the washington treaty. in 1931, the u.s. and philippines signed a military alliance treaty. later, the passage of the philippines constitution. all of those most important legal documents have never been a territory. once the different sides

realized there were some resources for oil or gas, it will become increased. even though china has a much , our military muscle pushed too much. there are dozens of fishing thes from china fishing and philippines sunday flagship of catch.y to try to fishermenf chinese have been killed, injured, tortured or put in prison by the philippine government in the past few decades. that's the fact. we can discuss it.

i just provide you chinese perception. i'm sure americans and philippines have different perceptions. but that is why we gather today to discuss. through discussion, we can find out the truth. the faster way and not just to according to the -- without china putting the wood into the fire and make that tension to disturb the whole region. >> thank you very much. next question. >> i would like to ask a

question about china's to mystic politics because i think it would be widely acknowledged lot inina has achieved a terms of lifting people out of poverty. so far, so good. capable do you think the chinese government will be legitimacyntain this in light of the new challenges? how much do you think that is possible? exactlyt's not politics?

like to have an acknowledgment from my chinese colleagues. that is a very popular word concerning the future of china. >> [speaking mandarin] >> the problem is economic restructuring. the same is true with the u.s. economy. we export to u.s. too much but

consume too little. that should be reversed somehow. lex [speaking mandarin] we are relying on export led growth for too long and now it's time to reconsider the sustainability by turning to consumers. anticorruption campaign, what do you think of the long-term impact of the future of china? i think most chinese people agreed with corruption is one of the biggest challenges for present china. toall support such efforts crush the corruption. my expertise -- i just remind

that may be in the past 30 years, i doubt whether there are many people in the world that cant imagine that china have such an economic boom. but the fact is we did it. least cautiously optimistic. with the development of the urbanization process, that means , but if one orms two of them will be resolved, it will open a new gate for future development of china.

difficulties also means opportunities sometimes. >> thank you very much. time is running out. issuesur many important such as the arms sales to taiwan, human rights, climate of weaponsliferation of mass destruction, did nuclear eyes asian in the korean peninsula, you name it. it would take hours to address those major concerns. to -- of of g2g might be interesting. but to wrap up this very interesting discussion here about 35 years of a bilateral relationship, let me quote one punchline. -- we allnds taller

have our mistakes and vulnerabilities. if we adopt a forward-looking attitude in shaping this important relationship, it will not disturb the national interest of the two countries, but help maintain peace and stability for the rest of the world. and onevery meaningful of the major reasons why we are brought here to discuss issues. thank you very much for your attention and time. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] >> the u.s. house will gavel in shortly for short speeches.

they will likely be in for a couple of minutes and then recess until 2:00. legislate of work starts today with several bills including a couple dealing with ukraine and sanctions against russia and funding for voice of america and radio free europe to increase its broadcasting in southern ukraine and crimea, both starting at 6:30. the senate passed both of those bills last week but did not include the imf language in the loan bill. now live to the house floor here on c-span. house will be in order. the chair lays before the house a communication from the speaker. the clerk: the speaker's room, washington, d.c., april 1, 2014. i hereby appoint the honorable virginia foxx to act as speaker pro tempore on this day. signed, john a. boehner, speaker of the house of representatives.