retaliation should have consequences completely mitigated for direct or indirect or future consequences of their whistle blowing. in other words, you shouldn't suffer consequences for whistle blowing and being victims of pursuedent retaliation, either direct, indirect or those that may arise in the future. of thon retaliation and who were named in the various reports went on to have great lives with no impact on them, and i was the only one who suffered any consequences. three of the areas that are highlighted in this section of u.s. law. view, what is wrong with the u.n. system, having been one of them for 28 years, the

accountability institutions of the u.n., there are three of them. there is the ethics office, where comes to whistleblower protection. there is an office of internal wersight services, to which referred, the inspector general, and the third is the justice system. each one of these is broken in some way. office, if we just look at the evidence, of the numbers, and i get these from the government accountability project, which is representing me in terms of advocacy here in washington and elsewhere, and we have the president here in the audience , there have been -- since the establishment of the ethics office in 2006, as i ever been told, 2013, there have been more who 300 whistleblowers and

have come forward to the ethics office. of those, the ethics office reviewed 99, and they found retaliation in only two cases, two. mine is not one of those two. they turn down my case for but that is an astonishingly low percentage. .2% or depending on what your denominator is, but it is a very, very low percentage. it is just a shame, profoundly. second, there are cases that have been referred to that indicate witness tampering, evidence tampering, lack of commitment to getting their job of interference, because there is political interference. the detailso into of what we discovered in terms of the evidence of my case, but

they said there was no retaliation, but when we looked at it, it was absolutely clear they chose to set aside evidence they had in their possession to find there was no tally nation, and i do not know of an explanation for that. the third is the justice system. ed as mentioned, there are some very, very courageous , but theythe tribunal have complained about tampering with the statute, the organic statute, the statute that defines their domain as well as the limits to how their case law can be applied to expanding the statute for whistleblower protection, so that is harmful to whistleblower protection. case, we will have a

hearing and have our appeal heard in vienna, the u.n. appeals at the tribunal, thursday. d hasl be going, and e provided me with much discouragement this morning, as have many others, but i am not discouraged, again because i am here for their pursuit of -- i feel like i have gotten the truth out, and people understand what happened. i was not a corrupt u.n. official who was fleeing my wrongdoing but, in fact, i was blowing the whistle of the wrongdoing of my senior colleagues and some other officials, and the final judgment in my case, we have been told, will be rendered in a pronouncement eight days later, the 27th of june, so at long last, more than seven years after all of this happened, i may be at the end of this long

and winding and very tortured road, which i do not believe thinke the end, because i with the new u.s. law in place mentioned, as i requires each and every u.n. agency to adhere to whistleblower best practices or face an automatic withholding of 15% of their u.s. contribution, and that is a substantial amount of money in most cases, the u.n. is under pressure to change its far as the point about immunity, i would add, and i know this because i was one of ofm, there is a culture impunity, so it is both immunity and impunity. it is the case where the people at the top don't feel any real commitment to getting out internal corruption, to protecting whistleblowers, to reform, which we hear about over

and over again, the u.n. system, so that is a grievous shortcoming, and one of my suggestions would be to have thatsort of external body is as independent as one can get , with funding and staffing which is independent of u.n. mechanisms but which has some sort of authority to make binding judgments on those in the secretariat. i do not know how that can be done, and i shrink from the task of trying to take away immunity. i admire those who are pursuing it, because i think it is manyitely unwarranted in cases, but assuming that that this is onelace, idea, and i am not a big fan of

the u.n. ethics office. record of three and under that come forward, and the number that keeps going, and the number that have proven their case for retaliation is the same. i think something must be done with the ethics office. perhaps even getting rid of it. so, with that, thanks. and thank you all for coming today. [applause] >> and, bob, we are ready for you whenever you are ready. >> good afternoon. can you hear me? the volume can put up a little bit higher. >> i was having a little bit of trouble. i hope i will not cover it you'll much of the same ground. -- covered too much of the same ground.

these are critically important , and we are keeping these issues at the forefront, and it is so important. anduld echo the sentiments completely agree with just about everything the two previous speakers alluded to, and i think i am going to go over some of the same areas that were being raised, and i hope i will not be too repetitive, but i think it is worth exercising what it is that is deficient and these different pieces to the u.n. administration justice, but, again, i think one of the major problems here is the privileges of immunity that have been granted at the u.n., and the way it has been interpreted by the organization, i agree that maybe there is a misinterpretation of

its expansiveness and the reach of privilege and immunity, and it is causing havoc to ripple the u.n., and i would also offer that that hurts. the lack of a true immunity and framework hurts accountability. what you are seeing is examples, particularly what you identified at the outset. lacknces which demonstrate of accountability, which, quite frankly, are really something that is unacceptable. you know, when i came into the u.n., i first came in, and there was the investigation with the leadingnd then my group

the investigation of the then any-general, and independent entity which was not bound by the rules and regulations of the u.n., able to do a little bit more of an independent investigation, i think, and had an opportunity to be a little bit more accurate, andough, and relevant, becoming chairman of the task force, it was an offshoot. we operated within the u.n. rules, within the u.n. and the dynamic changed considerably, and what we saw -- if you didwas not know any better, you thought the world was upside down, because the investigator became the subject, and the subject became the victim, and so many case, we proved

very clearly that an official was steering 100 million dollars in contracts to a telecommunications firm that hailed from the same country that he was from, and the evidence was very solid, and it was referred to the national authorities in the u.s., and they prosecuted the case, and they convicted the staff member of fraud and unlawful steering of contracts, and he got jail time for that. was put out earlier in the conversation that in order for a criminal case -- for the criminal code to be applied against a member, the secretary-general has to wait privileges of immunity of the organization. if the secretary-general does thechoose to waive those,

person can go completely scot-free in anything and becauseng he has done there is no effective system to truly address wrongdoing, episf ha thessfu ccountability with context, and whereas the nationstates ot cas,ens to natiut area itthhe blackhole. cases that have not been followed up on. there have been staff members who were identifiedhaving

misused, misappropriated funds, that ha tified that have not been held accountable. so the question, why is that? at ever happen? ced international organization. among ings n id o co dynamic, which is the u.n., you would think, wstroght why does it not? misappropriation, cases of malfeasance, cases of loss of e b press, veryer unwelcome news, and also lots of

messaging that caneo the view of many in the organization is the u.n., which is dependent on donor problems ifs, has donors see headlines of funds,ion and loss of and then there will be a cessation of donations to the organization, thereby ending the organization, so what we really strong a very self-preservation ideal that permeates the organization, and i am not saying everyone. certainly those in positions of responsible for their administration, for the many u.n. employees who are making a career out of the u.n.,

and those who hope that they never become a subject of a case, which is wrongly or even it mightursued because not end up in their interest. a dynamic. with this kind of a system, a it does not promote sound and effective administration of justice. and the point earlier was the of that who is the real overseer here? the real overseer is the united states and the diplomats, and what is that? it presents a significant stands ino have those interested positions when

viewing and overseeing and judging oversight, this function. what you need is a truly professional, independent body that is truly professional and not beholden to the administration, not beholden to the organization that can review the cases that have taken place, and there are challenges and claims that there misconduct,rors, and also a lack of justice. reading the last case that came out of the u.n. tribunal, as was , the case islier actually about two investigators who had been retaliated against by a senioreir job member of their office, and

there has been no accountability, and there has , despiteepercussions the fact that the findings of the tribunal judge were extremely strong, extremely clear, and hardly profoundly challenge. and yet, you have two whistleblowers who have been victimized and suffered severe consequences for their career, and you have the perpetrator who is unaffected, so that role a very sour sends message to the rest of the organization and to the rest of the folks, not only on the oversight body, but through the administration and the organization. you count on this organization, especially the oversight body, to effectively

meet out sound and proper investigations, and yet you have results that are occurring like that, where you have no and people even being identified as victims, found to have been wrong, still , and minimal/no recourse there has been no accountability for the wrongdoing, so it is a in numerousation respects, and certainly the thatng that the immunity has been put forth by the organization, it does not reach the level as far as they claim they do, but there also needs to a more structured reconstruction of the accountability and oversight mechanisms in the organization

to make them truly fair, truly wayuntable, and truly a -- that theyases are able to go through the system, and i think they were that the ethics office has not found any significant or only two significant retaliation cases. retaliation is one of the hardest things to prove, and it is clear in a national context that retaliation can be proved by circumstantial evidence and , and i thinkd without acknowledgment of that, that many national authorities have, you're never going to have an effective ethics situation

with retaliation. the cases are difficult to prove, and they have to know what to look for, and there are certain indexes which are cases,y present in such because without a strong whistleblower program where confidence can be built upon, it and it will be, disincentive for people to report wrongdoing and misconduct in the organization, especially when they do not see a level of when cases are not handled to fruition and final decisions that are fair and just, and there is not a proper voice and mechanism in assuring that complaints will not be harmed, and when there is

a mistake made that it can be corrected. or throughcial forum the investigative process, and there are so many different ways in which these cases can be derailed through errors, even innocent errors, not just , whereonal malfeasance these cases can go off the track. you have real lives and real careers. >> thank you, bob. before we go to q&a, i wonder if you could just briefly describe some of the successes of the task force, what made it different, and where those cases are right now. >> do you want me to answer that? >> yes, please. tooke task force in 2006

more than 300 cases which fraud,d broad, financial and also they took over cases where they would be accused of misconduct, and in the three years, as you can imagine, there was no way we could complete the entire inventory of the cases. approximately -- i do not have the numbers in front of me, but a little over 200 than 26nd we found more significant fraud and corruption schemes, some of which we concluded, and some we did not and that needed to be followed up, and certainly some with significant financial loss. others where there have been andty harsh mismanagement

misuse of u.n. funds and misuse of u.n. positions. when we disbanded at the end of for the mostases part went into a black hole. ,ases that were reported on many cases which we thought were to reach at least the administration of justice. and there was further work that it seemsbe done, and not to have any further work. disclosure of work to whiche, and cases in individuals and missions that found tod have been or cases misconduct,

in the administration of justice within the organization, not even outside it were not taken that is certainly the appearance that is being provided, and nothing has been and there is time, to make thesen cases, because when you may cases, you can sometimes make enemies, especially with officials in senior positions, and there is a disincentive unless they are truly protected to move forward on those cases. the long and short of it is, there was a lot of work that seems to have not been pursued, others that have been dropped, cases that have faltered and not made their way through the justice system. >> thank you. for a few questions

and answers from the audience, but i am going to go ahead and lead off with one short question , and that is, jim considering the outlying circumstances for the legislation that was just passed in january about the whistleblowers standards by congress, do you think that in the u.n. organization, they currently meet those standards? no? >> absolutely not. >> so you'd be surprised that the organization can certify that it would meet those standards and that the money should be paid? >> i do not think they should, but whether they will or not is another question. >> ok. sir, in the back, please. i am sorry. i do not see anyone with the microphone, but just state your question loudly, and we will have the answer here.

concern that is two parts. in the united nations, you have -- people that come from different legal major ones, and francee iran, civil law, , and most of the world is under civil law. common law, and then the israeli system. under which of those paradigms does the legal, investigatory, and -- are the differences between these legal systems partly at fault for the

stymieing? extent might there be extrajudicial legal bodiesration that the are not putting in these reports but which might influence them, such as this was necessary for , and they mayn not know, and the investigators -- what the consequences might be? me is, ok, weises know, and here is the settlement

. a nondisclosure agreement. be quiet. why is there not more of that? >> so the question is how does the u.n. judicial system arbitration process base itself on common law, civil law, etc., and to what extent the political circumstances of an incident may come into play in the decisions, to you want to go first? >> sure. mixture of the common law and civil code, and as to your second question, does that contribute to some of the problems, i think it does. my experiences within the u.n. --tem, and bob may wait a weigh in on this also, it is based on documents. they do not place great weight on witness testimonies, cross-examination.

it is pretty much, as in the civil code, were the document is superior, and i think as to the --t part, is that a reason is their secrecy because there might be some underlying consideration, probably, that describing the chamber, and i thought we moved beyond that. there are mechanisms that governments already use to deal with sensitive issues, but today in the u.n. system, there is just no disclosure, and the secrecy has to be dealt with, other than just go away. i would hate to see secrecy being used as an excuse for inaction. there are those that came

,orward with the ethics office and some feel that he is still being retaliated against, and there is nothing dramatic or or secret, no forces behind this that i am aware of , so i of the cases certainly would not use that as an excuse for inaction. >> bob, do you have a comment on the basis for the judicial system, and in your experience, did you find that secrecy laid into some of the decisions that came out? part answer the first first, two things. you have a series of rules, and the charter, with rules of

, various rules of conduct, chapter one of the staff rules, and that can be a basis. charter,ust out of the out of the seminal documents in the u.n. that was promulgated back in the 1940's. we also have a second category which aren't natural laws of the particular country you are involved in. sometimes you need to pay heed as well. the fact that you're in a certain country. bribery, and i think there is a tension between which laws should apply, and it shouldn't be one that strictly prohibits paying bribes, or the local law which sees it as a custom and a duty and a way of

life to do so, so there is a real issue, and the other issue that deals with the secrecy piece is a critical need in a and your services have been procured roughly, but it is critical that you need to get that item through, and otherwisefood, and people may suffer and die, so which is of importance there? you're going to impose a system of law and accountability, or are you going to put a premium or more importance on the items? a lot of times, the importance of the item is a good ways out,

and the issue underlying it, the bribery and corruption, is buried. >> let me just add to that. i think that those are exceptional cases that should be examined one by one, and some of the underlying assumptions should probably be examined very carefully before going forward and making a leap of faith, this is the only way to get those goods and services to people in need. that principle can very easily be abused. >> hi, my name is -- [inaudible] you propose this? >> yes, just to repeat the if the new u.s. law

enacted in january is addressing the issue of privileged immunities with the u.n. treaty. >> it does not specifically mention that issue. where that issue of immunity dovetails, there are five that are specifically mentioned. in the larger work done on whistleblowers and best practice, there is a mention of immunity. and the withdrawal of immunity, and i think, perhaps, one of the members can address that. where the best practices come into and the government accountability. >> bob, would you like to address how you would go after if you areular issue

inclined? to address this problem? >> one problem with this law is on a case-by-case basis, there is the example that brett gave about one that derived most of its funds from patent application fees. if you percent of which come from american patent applicants. the u.s. government pays a very small amount of money to that group, and therefore, in my opinion, the group does not comply with this law, but it is probably not going to make any difference because they do not get very much money from the u.s. and would not care if the u.s. cut off whatever contributions it has made, even though in my view today, one of them is corrupt because of the lack of accountability, so i .pplaud the work

certainly, you have to do something like that, but it is a start. in a case like that, it does not address the problem. bob, would you like to comment, or are you fine? you have any other questions from the audience? yes, ma'am? >> and who certifies it? >> the state department. -- >> they are taking the issue very seriously. they have circulated a questionnaire where they are gathering logistics. was not focusing on policy. it was focusing on implementation of policy, as the

andnization has policies, some of them read very well, but it is really how that policy is implemented, so i think that they are taking it seriously, and we will see what they come up with in the end. i think it will be submitted to congress, and then it will be up to congress to decide whether there will be these notifications, the documentation collected, and if the facts collected are adequate. i think the government accountability project and others are watching this very closely. >> ok, i will conclude with a final question, and that is do you get the sense that the united states is unique in its concern about these types of issues, or is the frustration of the treatment of whistleblowers more widespread than that? the efforts that tom trying to undertake is

internationalize this movement for whistleblower protection in the u.n., and i am in touch with civil society organizations, governments, and with media in a variety of other countries. with majorg closely donors of the u.n., and there is considerable interest. the fact that the u.s. has taken this step has generated curiosity, and other countries particularly, those which have a strong rule of law and strong believe in whistleblower a look at are taking taking action themselves. whether that means withholding or political pressure or some other manifestation, i do not know. but there is interest in it. in other countries have picked this story up. they are quite actively pursuing it, and that hopefully will generate a constituency that will put pressure on politicians

to do the same thing, as has happened here. quickly, i think the u.n. has to be treated, particularly in this type of question, as they exercise many indicators of being a sovereign state, although they are not a sovereign state. in fact, they are almost like a supernational state because of the immunity, but they get a pass. for example, transparency international does not review the u.n., and i do not know why. i think they should. so i think we have to come back and re-examine that, as well, to make sure if they are functioning as a quiet life state that they have the same accountability -- if they are state,ning as a quasi that they have the same accountability. i am not sure. >> any final remarks? bob, any final remarks?

i think many of the important things have been said today, and i think a lot of these things will be brought to the four -- and helps to have viable protection programs. it helps to have a viable administration of justice and to have fair and equitable results in the way cases are treated properly. now, if there is desperation with this issue, these issues have gone on for some time. going on for many years now, and i think there has wen a lot of casualties, and need a vested interest and some energy to address it, because it is ao have suffered,

travesty to have them just fall by the wayside. for this to continue. >> thank you very much, and thank you all for coming today. i hope you enjoyed it, and good night or g

>> we'll also take your calls, facebook comments an tweets. "washington journal" live every onning at 7:00 a.m. eastern c-span. >> tuesday, human services secretary kathleen sebelius talks about the health care enrollment period. she's at the national conference in washington. you can see her remarks live starting at 8:30 a.m. eastern on c-span2.

>> we would absolutely miss vitally important things. instead of trying to do that and failing, we decided what if we just gave snapshots of st. louis history that would give people a glimpse of all the diverse things that have happened here and they could use their imagination to fill in the best. so we tried to choose the most diverse selection we possibly could. we're standing in the 50 section of the 250 and 250 exhibit right now. this is what most people would call the real history. this is where the object is right in front of you. brewing is such a huge part of st. louis' history. it's an amazing story with lots of different breweries. he most famous became an

highser bush. the largest in the world. anheiser the era of ush producing it, this is from anera where things were simpler. the days before they had cans or bottle caps, they put corks on the top of bottle and somebody had to do it by hand. you can see it's got foot peddles that's where the operator would push down with his feet. and it's got three holes for three different size bottles. >> this weekend the history and literal liar of st. louis, the gateway to the west on c-span's book tv and c-span 3's "american history tv." >> now a discussion about eric cantor's loss and a roll the

a party played in the 2014 elections. joining us now, former congressman tom davis, of virginia, former chairman of the national republican congressional committee. thank --guest: thank you for having me. host: the big news in political circles is the defeat of eric cantor. what is the message for republicans out of that? districts.her there were a number of tea party challenges around the country this year that had a lot more effort than the one in the southern district. it was supported by national groups. idaho, probably a more conservative district, those numbers were on their toes at this point.

in this case, i don't really think that eric and his team really saw the seriousness of this challenge until election night. washington completely missed it, they take a look at how much is raised into his in the race and everything else. listening to yesterday's interviews, there were discussions that internal polls had him up by 30 points, how do you miss something like that? done pollingave for me in the past, but primaries are hard because in virginia anybody can vote in a primary. if you go back to previous primary voters you would have missed a huge chunk of the electorate. it would have gone from 43,000 to 65,000. a 50% increase in the number of people showing up. i think the pollster just missed that in their sampling. there were other factors on the ground. this is a different type of

year. when i was campaign chairman and things were unsettled, i said spend your money and don't take chances. and unsettled electorate can do a lot of things that nobody anticipates. in this case he ended up with millions still in the bank without realizing the seriousness of the challenge. eric is a good leader and i hope he considers having a future in politics, i think he is a good leader and has been great for the state. after his defeat activists said that this was a sign of a populist surge. you did not have a tea party when bush was in the white house, but we have a lot of deficit spending. a lot of spending proposals coming in. presidents tend to mask those kinds of differences within a as president obama

has masked some of the difference is that the democratic party has between its progressive wing and its other wings. but in the grassroots, take a look at what has happened to the average american over the past 20 years. stagnant wages with two wars that have gone sideways but cost a lot of money with lots of human tragedy. an economic meltdown and the to the meltdown is a wall street bailout. people are very frustrated and the tea party is one manifestation of that. their anxieties are real. politicians they can learn to and -- until they can learn to understand that, we will continue to have these initiatives. host: how divided is today's republican party? guest: it is a coalition. some would like to make it a private club, but they are a coalition that gets together to

elect majorities and then you fight it out. there are substantial divisions within the party on a number of issues. trade economics, cultural issues, but so are the democrats. that is the way it has always been. what the republicans have to learn now is that we have had two national elections we have where democrats got absolute majorities. there are more democrats than republicans right now if everyone shows up and republicans need to learn to get their act together and to bury the differences between elections or they will continue to be well. guest is the former congressman from virginia, tom davis. to join the conversation this morning -- host: i want to ask you about something that you said about to haveyour party, that

to make these decisions you become radioactive to the base. that was fascinating. guest: right now voters are republicanicularly primary voters. they want to send that message of anger to the white house. when you behind the cut -- become the kind of angry representative who is in their face every day, they like that, it expresses their pain and anger. when you suddenly have to make decisions of reopening the government by passing it that you are collaborating, no longer expressing the anger, you are seen as part of the problem. that is hard of the problem that leaders face in an unpopular congress. mitch mcconnell faced the same thing in kentucky. he got out early and got out ahead of it with more resources thrown against him with eric cantor. he was able to overcome it.

look, that is a problem for every leader. leaders who are popular in the district. host: when you look at mitch mcconnell as opposed to eric cantor, what is the difference there? host: lindsay graham came --guest: lindsay graham came at a congress of me, and amazing politician, but he was fortunate that not a lot of money went to anyone of his opponents, it was kind of fractured. but he also knew the issues where he was up against the administration and he was able to drive the anger on a few issues and then on others he could respectfully disagree. he is an incredible politician. if you know him. very smart guy. is not, buthat eric eric had the mantle of being in congressional leadership, where

when it comes to raising the debt ceiling and reopening government, you are part of that . you are part of that at that point. you are seen as a leader at that point. host: some of your calls this morning -- reading, pennsylvania. i have got a couple of questions i want to tell you. back in the libertarian party, the tea party, the republican party, we all believe the same thing. this is crazy for the whole country to sit there and fight each other instead of getting together and becoming one party. just like barry goldwater, god we are theoul, people for america. we have to fight for america and not for the people create the politics, we are for the

american people and we are not doing that. fors get on the ball, christ's sake. this is a laughingstock to the world. guest: thank you for the call. i am to stand a lot of voters feel this way at this point. for the country first, move ahead in uniting. the differences between the unitarian wing and mainstream wing of the tea party are not that great in the scheme of is all but politics about exaggerating differences. particularly in primaries. consultants are paid to draw those kinds of lines and elect people. a few nasty defeats will get a .arty together than anyone else are they ready for the third time to unite? that remains to be seen. melvin is on the democratic line. columbus, ohio. caller: if the republicans had

not stayed in office, where country have been? they put us in the situation we are in. they seem to not be able to come to that conclusion. they are always blaming obama for everything. they are the ones who put us in this mess. had obama not been in office, we would trouble the have been in the great depression. that is exactly what they wanted. they must think that we as a people are dumb or something. whatever is doing good for the country, not their personal. we are the people. there are really two different narratives it going on out there. probably more, but two major and age -- two major narratives. the president has been in for six years now.

he owns some of these problems. looking around the world it is still an unsafe place. it worse,is making not better. the other narrative is -- look at the problems he inherited, we are badly -- better off with creating jobs. that is politics, trying to make your way through the narratives of what is happening. the tragedy is that you are getting republicans and democrats not speaking to each other legislatively. are note and senate coordinating on everything. this year in the senate, of all the bills that came before the senate, republicans have been given a total of nine amendments. as a result of that they tend to shut things down over there. in the house it is frankly majority rule. one former speaker said that the minorities rule in the house is to make up the quorum and collect your paycheck. in the old days it was much more collaborative. but in the old days the parties

were not ideologically sorted like they are today. today there are not any conservative democrats or liberal republicans. maybe one or two in the house, but take a look at the vote ratings from national journal, the most liberal republican is more conservative than the most conservative democrat. we have morphed into a behavior that is more like a parliamentary system. we have not learned to grapple with that. it used to be that all politics is local, but we have morphed is noomething -- politics longer all the local. it has become national everywhere. we have moved into parliamentary behavior and it just does not fit. host: one of the issues that has been a big sticking point has been immigration. over the weekend during the sunday show interviews, eric cantor was asked if his position on that played a role. let's take a listen to what he had to say. [video clip]

has not changed on immigration. it is the way that it was before the primary, during the primary, and now. i have always said that i am not for comprehensive amnesty but kids who findthe themselves here and do not know another passage home. i do think that it is the only plausible way forward in terms of immigration reform, that we focus on things that we agree on, not on the things that we don't, building the trust to get things done. i have said this to the president, my colleagues are aware of the position. i am sure that it aggravated people on both sides of the issue, but it is the principal position i have taken and i believe it is the right one. that is a very centrist position today. a pretty wide margin from the

house. amnesty has really been defined i talk radio and some of the television pundits as opposed to what it really is in this case, but eric's position is hardly radical. ita republican primary, morphs into amnesty and the emotions get very high. this is made particularly worse by the tens of thousands of kids know crossing the border and coming into this country, looking for american aid. the status quo is just unacceptable and immigration. for people who do not want any action, if you think the status quo is acceptable with these people across the border now and young people and stuff like that, i have got news. we need action. pennsylvania, george is on the line for republicans. caller: i am more than a republican. what this country wants and why

there was a defeat is we want truth. we do not get truth. we get people in office, "i did not win because i did not say this right or do that right. " of malarkey.unch you need good and talented and well educated people. we need to go back in time and reflect on the writings of socrates and aristotle more. and get to the truth. that is what people want. i have prayed for it and asked for it. onm tired of people coming with this agenda and that agenda. democrats are bankrupt morally

and republicans, you do not know what side of the fence they are on. i appreciate the comments that one of the problems we have today is, what is true? you go to websites and there are different variations of the truth and it is like they are from different planet. it is difficult to sort out. you do not have the kind of filters in terms of content today. people are exposed to all kinds of facts that are not really fast. i have seen things on the internet. birthbarack obama's certificate on the internet from kenya. you start to believe it until i saw his birth certificate on a different site and i said, this cannot be right. to content ratio on the internet dirty a lot of different fax. cycleable news, a 24/7

they're not always accurate. often contradictory. it is difficult to sort out the. -- sort out. itis so left and so right, does not always comport to the facts. were a chairman right now, how would you advise candidates to run? 80% of house members in both sergeants are safe for their party. the november election does not really matter here it november is just a formality. just a primary. take it seriously. , you earn thatut throughout your tenure. if you have a difficult opponent in the primary, you spend a lot of attention and time in your

district and identify the issues and meet with your voters. take a vote that is not popular. i used to get beat up by the party base. move onto the next issue. people who do not do that, i think they become aloof and estranged from their district. example is in idaho. he spent a lot of money, a very conservative district. his record was probably more moderate than the party based it. back every weekend despite the fact -- >> in phoenix, ben is on the line for independent area -- independents. a number ofhere

votes the house of representatives did to represent obamacare? guest: i do not know how many votes they took to repeal it or part of it, but you have to remember the vote was a straight partisan vote very no republicans supported it. you traditionally find when one their agenda without the other party's votes, it is rarely over. the other party tries to dial it back or repeal parts of it. we will see this falling off from state to state, fought in the courts and fought in congress. as long as public opinion stays as divided as it is, you will see this. twitter --

i think midterm elections are about disgruntled ibo coming together and sending messages. presidential elections are about the future and can eating visions. my experience when i was campaign president in 2000 and 2002 was that these are often message elections. this year, democrats face a higher hurdle because they are perceived as controlling government even though they only control one third of government with the presidency. the president.er the republicans control the house. it is divided government and the ability to finger point. what you traditionally find in midterms is that the president posses party takes the blame. going well.ot last time, democrats controlled everything and republicans had historical gains.

it was the republican posses largest since 1938. this time, you will see republican gains because they .re the out party >> looking ahead to the midterms in the future after that, do you see opportunity for dealmaking with the white house in the next two ears? are things going to get done? so.s we hope divided government is the new normal. we have had it for almost 80% of the time. a look at the house of representatives and how it is constructed, democrats got 100 and 2 million more votes. the republicans have a 17 seat edge. that is a problem with the voting rights act, all of which gives democrats in and

republicans an advantage. youhe electoral college, have 18 states plus the district of columbia that have voted president 68 -- 6-8 times. democrats have been electoral college advantage. republicans have an advantage in the house. the end result has been divided government. that can do wonderful things. i was in a divided government with the clinton posses resident. we had dealmakers on both sides. it takes two to tango, extraordinary leadership. presidents today are fighting a polarized media. you did not have fox news and msnbc news where people to need

-- tune in each night to hear their own views. you did not have the internet where people tune into their own websites to hear what they want to hear. money was not with super pac's out on the fringes. it was still centered with parties. you had a lot more control than you do today. there are extraneous factors that make agreements harder. i have always said if the speaker and president reach an agreement and the media did not members phone lines ringing off the hook and the deal is undone. it takes extraordinary leaders to overcome that. i am hopeful we do this after the election that it has become tougher and tougher. on the line for democrats. >> good morning. i agree the government is divided. you made a good point.

it is really government by minority. republicans have the house and in the senate, every time we try to pass something, republicans yell filibuster and it has to go to 60 votes. republicans are always talking about the do notution, but i recall him the constitution that you had to have a supermajority to pass a bill. they also say republicans, if they listen to the people, well, if they really listened to the people, we would have a student loan bill, background checks, , aprehensive immigration road bill that would be repairing our roads and airports and i see in wage, our congress that they are more concerned about getting back

into office than they are about the people of the united states. all of those things i just pullingd had a majority for those bills. edt, the republican filibuster and the bill went down and fire. guest: thank you for your comments, i am certain in massachusetts, you represent the views of the people there. members are present individual district. they are not all like massachusetts. , background country checks are political death for people who support those. that is why so many members are indeed representing their distress. thatrepresent districts are far different from the districts in massachusetts. many of them from the south and

west. as far as the student loan issue i recognize it is a problem, but nobody read these bills. you are answering a question from a pollster about what it entails. there are a lot of complications. overriding all this is how do you view the deficit on the student loan bill? there is a cost to this. that, with allte of these problems, you mentioned the highway bill, infrastructure is crumbling. the color is correct. it is finding the appropriate offsets. it got so much harder to make policy these days because of the diversions of sets from each lyrical party and the perspectives and the fact that so many districts are single

party districts. the largest group of voters is 40%. you are in a safely drawn seat in your party, that is who alexia. inependents may dissipate november. independents wine. graham got 56%. i am a little concerned. it seems like the average joe sixpack takes it on the chin when republicans can together with a general agreement. lay the groundwork for the great

recession, but i also have an issue with fracking. i am not sure it will be safe. i would contend water is a if wegic resource area lose our water supply, with the trillium, i think we will be in more dire straits. i would not mind having the asset there if we did not needed for a strategic resource. the problem i have is congress counting chickens before they hatch and they want to use our newfound energy independence to influence or counter russia and ukraine. i would like to keep the oil and gas in the u.s. you for your comments. i would disagree with you on free trade. i was in a technology district.

everywhere i -- everyone i talked to was for free traders because there is selling products abroad. that was the largest market and a different perspective on that. our unemployment rate continues to be one of the lowest in the country. perspectivesferent on that. where you come from is where you said. -- six. sit. notwe just have come together on energy issues. we do not want to continue to finance a dysfunctional countries around the world. so weicing oil supplies can do better here domestically at home. i hope we get there. i am hopeful we can get the

pipeline issue done. right now, we are in gridlock. >> a question from twitter. -- question.ery good the answer is independents are independence for a reason. they do not agree on anything, either. they are and at collective group. i believe a strong independent candidate coming in when you have a dysfunctional state and a dysfunctional country running, can come in and claim the mantra and win. it has happened and it could happen here. it is a money issue. he will need someone to raise that kind of money. grassroots can come quickly. it is possible here. parties have been weakened through campaign-finance reforms and other things we're at it has

not happened yet. mayor bloomberg in new york was selected as an independent. has different lines for different parties. he had the republican line. you had four or five different lines you can run on. every state is a little knew ye -- unique. institutionally, it is hard and independents do not all agree and that is why they are independence. ellen is on the line for republicans. caller: i have been listening to this man speak and everything he says makes sense. i have been writing to the republican party and telling them to get along with the tea party. they're coming up and can join the republican party and they are very strong. it does not have to be it is

and the republican party the republican tea party. it is silly and the president has an awful about everything. the roads in pennsylvania are awful. we need help. i think the railroads should be used much more. the energy problem is ridiculous. we should have our oil pipeline going like crazy. thank you for the comment. continues to echo the frustration we hear across the country. everybody has a different point of view. it ought to be about outputs and not just input spared outcomes. and includes infrastructure investment of some kind. it includes energy policies.

the climate with change issues as a part of that. deficit issues, we know the current course we are on is not sustainable. none of these are easy to solve. it has become more convenient for political leaders to not act on them. the cost of acting becomes so high. not everyone will agree with the solution. .e have a lot of solutions but it is a huge frustration. me to leave congress. i left congress undefeated and unindicted. i have been a committee there and i had a good run of it. sometimes, you think, i could do more productive things of my life very it we have people there for the right reasons. which putsf a group

republicans and democrats together. we have a problem solvers caucus trying to get together. i think it is coming but it is still very polarized as an atmosphere. >> we talked about image -- infrastructure. i'm curious what you think about the role in your party right now. social issues play a role in both parties in terms of coalitions. one totors that lead choose political parties are race, ethnicity, and cultural .alues a majority of the poorest counties voted for mid romney and some of the wealthiest floated for barack obama. these are not economic coalitions as we traditionally understand it. values andbout cultural issues. the social issues are not going away. for republicans, it is difficult because you have people who agree with you on issues but

they will not look at you if you -- if they think you are laughing at their lifestyle. democrats have the same issue where economically, their policies could be viewed as more beneficial to these people but if you're mocking their religiosity, you do not want to have anything to do with these people. same with ethnic groups. very conservative economically, but if you look at the party they view as something not welcome to immigrants, why be part of it? party has got to understand the coalitions are not favorable to them. immigrants and young people, republicans are losing. older people die off eventually. ahead.e got to look

that will take a look at some of the social cultural issues and acide immigration, how we get handle on this. that is a different discussion in the party. sherry is on the line for independence. caller: i have been a republican all my life until 2007. then i came out about obama running. fact checking. i just decided it was time for people to do some fact checking. they still need to. i just cannot be republican. the hatred and discrimination has gotten so terrible that i could not do that anymore. you know there is no way you will convince american people that obama has

to own part of this. only one that has saved us. i am 60 years old. if it had not been for him, we would be in major trouble. these people talking out of both that is their mouth, what happens to the republican party. thank you for your comments. there are two different american -- going around america. go backrd sometimes to and say, how did i feel six years ago? we are all in the here and now. i appreciate the call. host: a question about no labels. -- we have a number of

strong republicans and strong democrats. what it says is when you get to the negotiating table and when it comes to passing bills, we need to work together. we are a balance of power as government. we are not a parliamentary system. the system was designed to have a balance of powers that reasonable people could prevail. we had a constitutional convention where you july and down the middle and everyone took a hard-line, we never would have gotten anywhere very he would not have had the connecticut and virginia plan merge. people would have just riven hard and fast there at all we are trying to do is create discussion between members and recognize sometimes, problems are so overwhelming that everyone has to give a little bit. sometimes, just to understand what the other side is ranked. we talk across each other on this. no budget no pay was a no labels creation. agenda,a national things most people agree to.

we disagree on how to get to the goal but we have certain goals we all want. having adult discussions about that and sitting down and trying to solve it and that of pointing fingers to each other is what i think is long overdue. that is what it is about. there are members afraid to do anything, but we have very conservative members with no labels and liberals with no labels. i come to the table because i am paid to produce outcomes. host: tom is on the line for republicans. i had a quick question and if i could just expand it, looking regionally with the tea know, if you happen to just the strain right now of primary challengers in the

federal government, i know every two yes, it is all congress persons and than one third of the senate, but do you know offhand how many are being challenged by tea party members? is it a low number? less than five percent? more than 20%? i have been a lifelong republican and we do not have too many up here in new jersey. -- did run for guest: jon runyan's. a primary from the right. in southern districts, you have a lot of that. they are tea party. it is hard to put a label on everything. you're finding more primary

challenges than you would find in normal cycles at this way. it forces members to take a hard look at themselves. incumbents, we hate primaries. we think we ought to be given the job by the party because we have been doing a good job. it gets you back in touch with constituencies, back in touch with your voters, causing you to re-examine some thought. they can be pretty healthy at this point. most he party challengers have not gone anywhere. -- heic cantor upset i was the most conservative member of the house leadership. you're leaving more moderate members along. -- alone. thate seeing a lot of around the country. it is the sign of a dynamic hearty trying to come to grips with itself.

it is feeling outcast and wanting to be in on government or this stuff will get reconciled sooner or later you're that is historically what happens there it we will he more challenges >> coming up on the next "washington journal" we'll hear negroponte, former u.s. ambassador to iraq and former director of national intelligence, on the situation iraq. then norman ornstein of the enterprise institute on eric cantor's primary loss. young, president of kids in need of defense. she'll talk about her group's help unaccompanied imgrab miners -- minors. "washington journal," live every morning at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span.

republican senator rob portman, member of the budget committee, congressman chris van holland, budget committee outline their, federal budget priorities today. starting atyou that 10:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. earlier this year, f.c.c. wheeler unveiled a new proposal aim at increasing wi-fi access at the nation's and schools. he spoke about it at an event ofted by the institute museum and library sciencees. this is two and a half hours. it is my honor to welcome you all to the library this morning my guests for this

important hearing on the growing neil for broad band access in america's libraries. so libraries have been talking for years about bridging the digital divide, and i think that phrase has been around as long as i've been working in libraries, which is about 20 years thousand if not longer. i have to admit something, that seven or eight years ago i started getting tired of this divide.the digital my feeling was that the issue was increasingly less about bridging the digital divide and who are about bridging the divide.skills it was less about providing access and more about providing literacy. i'll also admit they was wrong the digital divide is as big as it's ever been, and because so much of the world has moved sceufl online, and those of us who haven't are at increasing risk. seven or eight years ago you most jobsy for

without being online. you can't do that today. seven or eight years ago you could communicate with your child's teacher without being on lawn. you could apply for health insurance online. seven or eight years ago could the high school equivalency examination. none of this is possible new without reliable high speed access and public lie presser remain the best option to level the playing field. i know that's true because of the success that the bod broadband opportunities program has had across the country, here at my previous job at the brooklyn public library. greatmazing things making strides not only improving the support publicto commuting, but addressing that well.l skills divide as but many of us are wondering how do we build on the success of is theogram and where additional opportunitying going to come from. i should take a moment on the of the digital literacy

about but himtalk the in which worry sitting. kij tall commons. in addition to providing basic aness, it provides access to increasingly sophisticated set of tools like the espresso book machine that require faster connect activity. this room really is the true public library serving the broad don tin you up aroundt learning needs aity. or it cost around dollars 3 4 million. i'm hoping our panel will take about some of this stuff. my flesher to introduce you to you susan hildreth, the director of the institute of and library services. susan has done so much in her tenure to elevate libraries in the public consciousness, and we really amazing debt of gratitude and we'll be go' but susan,

please, thank you. [applause] ourll right, i'd ask gentleman, the two toms, if you the joining me here on stage. good morning, everyone. me.se be here.wonderful to right. i have to talk quite a bit and i'll be drinking in between, and trust me, just, water. so first of all, welcome, everyone. event is being recorded and will be made available to the so everybody keep that in mine as we have our exciting dialogue here. pleasure to convene the institute of museum and library services hearing on libraries and broad band and i'm doubly excited because we're having nationalt event during

library week. hurt ray, library week! of course i want to thank our host, the krd public library. venue forve a better this event than the digital commons where connect activity and learning come alive. just take a look over there, this building just opened up and this place is packed with people using these resources. so this is what it's all about. the issue we're discussing today is of great importance to the millions of americans who use nation'sd at the 17,000 public libraries, as well as those who use broad banded access library resources. every day children, teens and use broadband at their local library to further work force and health information, and much more. to beay i am very proud joined by members of the in the museum and library services board. they're with me here on the podium, charles 2010 on the of

illinois, christy brandow of ofa, and winston tab maryland. the bore provides policy advice to imls. also fortunate to have another board member in the audience oh comes from the side of the house, and i see some miami faces out there. alsove you too. we are honored to have david fario with is, the archivist tufdz, there he is, hello, david, and he's got a lot of content that day does. and we're excited to have the past prt -- president of the american library association with us today. this is the first time that imls has idea its statutory authority advise the president, congress and the other federal andcies on library museums information services and also to hold public hearings. this authority was provided to during the 2010 reauthorization of the museum and library services act which imlsporated interest the

law, responsibilities that were previously held by the national libraries and information science. we chose this moment to use this new authority because this is a moment full of potential. we are encouraged that tom wheeler, the federal communicationings commission chairman, is working actively to modernize the e rate and telecommunication discounts for libraries and schools. consideration the analysis of justa that this they released queft, this moment is perhaps much greater importance of us may have realized. 15,551 individual libraries have used the discounts provided by te rate. actual number varies from lookingyear, however in at e heaven years worth of data, participationthe rate ranged from 67 to 73% of the u.s. braries in

so we are talking advantage of this program. the e rate was created 17 years when the first overhaul of the telecommunications act in 62 passed in 199 #. this is the same year that the museum and library services act was first enacted, creating imls and in a move that recognized importance of technology in the library world changed the library and services construction act, and some people do miss that. but we moved onto the library and technology act, lsta. imls support statewide initiatives and or --al provide priorities. sorry, folks. people.diverse to individuals with disabilities, individuals with functional literacy or

information skills. its creation they have recognized the importance of a connected society. i'd like to note for the record the national broad band plan issued four years ago recommended affordable access to secondt one giga bit per broadband service to institutions including libraries. f.c.c. through recent effort to modernize the e ray program, connect ednt's own initiative and the recent grants through the brd ban tech not opportunity demonstrate a national commitment and sense of speedy around high internet delivery and the opportunity for innovation that for ourrovides

communities. awenow that one-third of americans, 100 million people have not adopted broad band high speed internet at home, for a variety of reasons. and we also do not have million access at all. this has a dramatic impact on capacity of public libraries to serve those left out of the full participation in a digital world. the recent economic recession bears this out. millions of americans flocked to public libraries to access work force development and information on economic opportunities, our libraries establishedeir well role as community anchors. we know that america's job trustedheaded to their institutions during this challenging time often, relying on the library's internet to search for work or sharpen their skills much we also know that more than # 0% of

the fortune 500 companies today applications, job to succeed in today's society you need the internet. be to doubt the speed of internet connections matter and are critical to making good on delivering services and information our communities need. as a federal agency with a mission, imls has a unique vantage point. to better understand how to best seven the public interest much we're not here to support one path forward but instead to provide an opportunity for a public hearing to examine a variety of points we look forward to hearing from our our great panelists. we will examine the public of library broadband, analyze data, and hear about will bring high speed internet access to libraries. much and we'llry now begin with a wonderful f.c.c. chairman tom

wheeler. it gives me great pleasure to introduce the current f.c.c. chairman, thomas wheeler, who has graciously taken time to this thing off for us morning. we appreciate that. decades chairman wheeler has been charged in services, a policy expert, advocate and businessman much as an entrepreneur he or helped start multiple companies offering innovative and videoeless communication services. as i mentioned in my opening wheeler hasirman made it clear that understands the importance and role of andaries, with his vast diverse background on telecommunications and emerging very'logical issues worry fortunate to have him here with us today. tom wheeler.e [applause] >> thank you very much, susan board,the members of the

nice to see you all here. this is something very important, and congratulations andhe institute of library museum services for convening and for having this idea to help get this message out. there, i'mverybody privileged to share the podium today with my friend tom power house who has advocate,ding pusher, for the kinds of changes that we making to make sure that we're bringing the e rate into the 21st century. of also joined by a couple my colleagues who are intimately involved in this, jonathan chambers. and daniel alvarez. and when you look for fingerprints on what the if c.c. of e raten terms

reform you'll find john and fingerprints all over it. but there are also two other very important people in this audience. and i think that their presence here today creates a construct things.we can screws therman reed hunt, i have august responsibility of aslowing in reed's footsteps chairman of the f.c.c., and many names that eevitably get attached to the the program, the present at creation seminole name that is reedth hunt. there would be no e rate program without wreathed hunt, and that is -- reed hunt, and is that

just a factual statement. [applause] the archivist tufdz, david and he's also here, got more goodies in his house down on pennsylvania avenue than else in, and over the years i've been privileged of thoseround a lot goodies and hang around david. a library guy to begin with, folks, he was stole friend the new york public library where he was running that great institution. thewhat he's done at national archives is to open up the national archives ands so much of that concept of opening means digitization. and i want to give you a personal example of why what enabled canid have

.e transformative theote a couple books on civil war, and the most recent useabout abraham lincoln's of the telegraph. thank goodness at the national abraham there sit telegrams.andwritten the spielberg movie was a fabulous movie, but they got the wrong.ph office scene lincoln did not dictate his telegrams. out in long hand. and thank god he did, and thank thethey're saved at national archives. it becomes a one degree of separation. hold in your white hand the piece of paper

abraham lincoln wrote on, there's one degree of separation feel from abe ra happen lincoln. a privilege that a few researchers, like i was have, get.to what david has done is to documents.l of those not only the telegrams, but the ther great holdings of national archives. clickt there's one between someone who wants to and abraham lincoln. myused to be, when i started research on lincoln's telegrams, the microfilm copies of his telegrams, and i'd get

this, you know, susan is going oh, we all know that. you'd get and you'd sit down at this klunky machine and you through each microfilm picture one by one. canthanks to david you click and it's there. so because people like david fario digitized the product, the information, and because people reed hunt made that digitized information available, that's why the work that we're talking about here today in terms of the importance of keyaries is so incredibly to what gets done, because as in this room here we're moving from stacks of centers.online

the library has always been the to the world of information and ideas. a giga that on ramp is bit speeds. you know, as you all know, as i am seeing as i travel country, libraries are playing a more and more and important role in our communities. pointed out earlier, it's where americans without online.s go to get go to get online. go to applymericans for their v.a. benefits, or care, or their health job. for their

and it's where librarians end up guide at the side. as people make these kinds of explorations. as a history buff, of course, i've always been interested in that andrew carnegie history ofhe library america. and one of the things that everybody was always thinks steel.carnegie, carnegie was first a network guy. andrew carnegie started as a for theh operator pennsylvania railroad. he wasa matter of fact brought here during the civil war, and was responsible for telegraph line that went out towards manassas, make to it manassas

before the bats. but what lincoln knew about with the battle on about of first manassas was as a result of andrew carnegie's work. so it's appropriate that we're talking about libraries, about carnegie's contribution in making libraries what they were century.th and we come back to networks. e ratet's why modernization is so important. the program that we have is called the schools and libraries program. we need to also start calling it the libraries and schools program. to make sure that we recognize and emphasize the important thosebution of each of institutions. so what are we doing? from supporting

toh century technology 21st century high speed broadband technology. it's a reallocation of resources, reallocations of never easy, and never pleasant. but they're essential if we're keep pushing forward. broad band too the person at the library. it's not just the external connection, but it's how do you using wi-fi to the the library. # we're bringing the application and administrative process into the 21st century as well by using the same kind of broad band tools. we're focusing on fiscal responsibility. money, is not just more although if more money is warranted we will deal with that. key is money well spent.

encouraging consortium, by longer support perfect so you can have longer contracts with lower rates, and by a system of reference pricing so that people know what is a fair price. we don't expect telecom experts and be able to go out there and haggle with held e come companies. so how do we help in that regard? also to have limited pilot programs that test new could benefit -- really grateful to you and imls for launcherring today.alogue the timing is perfect. our public notice is out now and will shortly be releasing our for 2015 and forward.

there is incredible distinguished list of have lineds that you up today. but i want to just return, before bit sound i want to the historical roots here for a second much andrew innegie built 2500 libraries partnership.ate in the 19th century. he defined information access millions and millions of a century. over the precipice of the same kindhave on the flowimpact thenformation and ideas in 21st century. the work that you all

are doing is so important. that's why the reform and modernization of the e rate so essential. and that's why today's hearing kinds of topics that you're going to explore are so us who arethose of weing to work on just how do seize on this incredible moment of historic significance. all that you're doing. [applause] >> thank you, chairman wheeler. i know librarians don't haggle with want to telecom folks, but we haggle with everything that we do and do a pretty good job. right. also, we're excited to have a

from the gates foundation, and i have to say, carnegie,about andrew i also characterize bill and gatesa gates and the foundation as our 21st carnegie, sow libraries have been very lucky partnerships over the years. now i am very pleased to introduce thomas power, the the commercef of department's national telecommunications and information administration, who is currently on detail to the office of science and technology house, as the white deputy chief technology overs for telecommunications much mr. power provides managerial policy support for a right range of agency activities including internet policy making spectrum and recovery act, broad band grats program and was one the first individuals who really encouraged us to have this hearing and make it happen.

welcome, tom. [applause] >> thank you, susan. good morning, everybody, and you, imls for having this hearing of it's a real thrill to dias with chairman wheeler. he's one of my favorite, maybe person ine policy d.c., he's doing such a great job. well, second favorite. in the white house. watching.know who's ( laughter ) we're really trying to help you here through the connect ed program.nd the e rate chairman wheeler has identified some of the ways for, but we that the realze work happens at the local level thehe libraries at imls and other organizations represented here. so my maybe message this morning all the workou for you do. for some of us this is kind of personal, i can tell you that my

years as an0 elementary school teach examiner school and at the when she retired the local newspaper in our home town did her and one oft the questions was how have kids years. in 40 she see kids are kid, they don change much. but one thing that changed is that parents seem to have lost some focus on the idea this kids need to come to school prepared to learn. the school is not just the ill where education can happen and islanden they leave the education stops. the whole community has to be focused on education, it's the the school and it's the library. the's why the work of libraries is so important. i don't have to tell you that. community evident. we learn this through the program where i seven forward a couple years before moving to the white house much the applicationsen were the ones that had the whole support of the community, the

library, the school, the community, the mayor, the county, the governor. saw the where we community coming together to support the application were the ones we knew had the best chance succeeding and we're really proud of the work we did. she and the team did such a job. with the libraries in particular. todecked over 100 libraries i'm very pleased to announce releasing we'll be three case studies publish by an independent evaluation contractor, on the positive improvements and effects that is having inram

three library systems in particular. in texas public computer centers including over 120 library locations have provided 8 # thousand training hours to digital lit are sit, enable l people to search for jobs and housing online, connect family in other countries and all the other important uses that chairman to.ler referred so we'll be putting that blog up today. be done.here's more to we know the needs of the libraries. statistic that 06% of libraries report that they are free internete of

access in their communities. we've all seen the image, the closed and the kids are on the steps, sucking that the wall, through trying to connect. glass can lob at that as half full, because it means the aren't getting the resources they need to be open. but we've got the kids and adults on those steps in the cars ask that's a good sign. arey millions of americans using the internet at their local libraries to study for applys or certificates, for jobs, develop new skills and .articipate in civic affairs of course they're able to all income or of age or ability. even for folks who do have home, if you're trying to study or do certain home, maybe the

environment simpson the best place to did it. we

we will support you because we know it takes all of us to make this effort a success. thank you for having me here. have a great day.