session with mary fallin and mr. hickenlooper. they will talk about job training and education ideas. that starts at 11:45 a.m. >> tune in this weekend for the harlem book fair. saturday ate starts 11:45 eastern on c-span2. by ed royce on foreign policy issues, including afghanistan and iran. this is held earlier at the "christian science monitor." >> thank you for coming,

everybody. our guest is representative ed royce. this is his first visit. we are grateful to him for coming this point. he is a native californian and a graduate of california state university school of business administration. his interest in politics is long-standing. he headed you for reagan in the 1976 challenge to the then president gerald ford. >> [indiscernible] >> after her brief career in the private sector, in 1982 our guest was elected to the ,alifornia state senate athoring a law that made it

felony to stalk someone. he has been a member of the house foreign affairs committee since coming to congress and was named the chair in the member 2012. now onto the ever popular process portion of our program. we are on the record here. logging or tweeting and no filing of any kind while the breakfast is underway to give us time to listen to what our guest says. no embargo when the session ends. several pictures of the session to all reporters here as soon as the breakfast ends. if you would like to ask a question, do the traditional thing and send me a nonthreatening signal, and i will happily call on one and all. thefer our guest opportunity to make opening remarks, and then we will move to questions around the table. thank you for coming. >> that me begin by saying i was

ofan of reagan's, and one the things i noticed about his conduct on the hill was the way that he and tip o'neill conducted themselves. think a way in which i created an atmosphere in which things could he accomplished on the hill. one of my objectives on my committee, the foreign affairs committee, has been to try to create a similar type of dialogue. , mywith elliott engel ranking member, what we have tried to do is get members involved with foreign affairs, to create an open dialogue, to create a balanced way in which they not only participate, but we had these delegations which are engaged, which we take overseas, whether to ukraine recently or the middle east or to asia, and try to reach a consensus to do our job in a way that provides a united front in terms of the u.s. edition in

these parts of the world. and i would say so far we have been largely successful in that endeavor on the committee. i will give you a few examples of areas that we have been involved in, and then i know what you want to ask questions, f i could give you some broad issues come about how the united states could be more effective overseas, and one of those has been with our communications. thatf the early impacts affected me was an exchange program years ago when i was in west germany and east germany. in east germany at that time, i sell what radio free europe, radio liberty, was able to do in order to instruct a generation of young germans in political pluralism, in tolerance, and all these ideals that helped shape and eastern europe in very different attitudes and the bombastic propaganda that was

from west germany. instead, by using east german reporters and by having a vision of how we would introduce and balance information, we were able really during the reagan administration, this country was able to reshape the thinking there. what eliot engel and i are trying to do with our overhaul of the broadcasting board of governors and our system of reinvigorating radio free europe, radio liberty, and vio, is to get -- via, is to get back type ofeffective medication. we have talked to our former secretary of state and others who have testified about this, secretary clinton and others, and they say the current system is practically defunct. you have passed legislation over to the senate, we are working on this right now, and we believe it could have a very big impact, a -- it could create a very real

change to the way in which we can effectively offset ofpaganda in russia or lack information in the middle east, and provide access for people to have more ideas about political pluralism and tolerance in china. on another subject, we have spent a great eel of time on the committee following the situation in iran. of these for many members of the foreign affairs committee, they have a lot of experience over the years with deception on the part of the government in iran. in one of our concerns was to find pressure points where we might be able to get the iranians to the table. we did that with legislation on that passed the session. we passed legislation authored ande and this fundraiser --

cosponsored by eliot engel which really gives the ayatollah a choice, a choice between compromise on the nuclear program or economic collapse. we were able to pass that bill out of committee with bipartisan support, unanimously, and pass it off of the four with 400 votes to 20. administration oppose the legislation, but it was our opinion on the committee, those of a with experience on foreign affairs, that this type of pressure was necessary in order to be taken seriously in order for the u.s. position to be taken seriously. the administration has helped legislation up in the senate, but we are close to 2/3. and as of the situation continues to drag on, and of course, this week some of you will be following our secretary of state and wendy sherman's

further negotiations in vienna, with the iranians on this, but it is a good reminder in terms of the nature of this regime as we now see that these m-302's, these very long-range rockets, which i ran transferred to -- which iran transferred to were launched, it was a reminder that whatever negations -- negotiations we have ongoing with iran, there is this history of deception that was shared with us by the international oversighthich conduct attempts to to the h the un to comply wit security council resolutions and with international norms of behavior.

so these are some of the issues we are working on. a third issue would be try to open our markets overseas to u.s. exports. we are in competition with china models. very different the united states is trying to sell the ideal of opening to trade to our exports overseas with high standards for intellectual property, high standards with respect to these issues like indigenous innovation and so forth, trying to set a standard that does not allow political poll, but it's instead allows the rule of law to comply. we are competition -- we are in competition with china, so political influence is determining at the end of the day what products can enter the country. what we are trying to do with trade initiative

and southeast asia and along the pacific rim is to pull countries together with these high standards. we are attending to do the same thing simultaneously with your. if we succeed in this, and we system of highld standards -- high standard agreement, and we will have one that can put an enormous pressure on those countries which seek not to comply with international law. and one of the things we are doing is trying to convince the administration to the more supportive of their own initiatives here. the administration often announces an initiative, but then does not do anything to support its implementation, and in south asia and east asia that is important. with that said, why don't we open it up your questions. >> i will give you a long-winded question to give you a chance to

take a bite of you wish to. let me throw out the ceremonial softball to begin, and that is about what you see as the biggest foreign-policy threat to the u.s. when you were selected as chairman, use of the greatest threats facing u.s. and now allies is iran. is that still your view, sir, or are there other issues that have eclipsed that in terms of being the most important threat to the u.s.? >> we were on track to take some steps to offset the danger from iran. one of those was the interceptor program that we had worked with czech republic and poland that if they developed an inm, and there were worries europe about what's up did it take to protect itself, and that program would have protected

your. it also would have protected the united states. with the decision by the president of the united states to pull that system, to not go forward with that system, in order to reset the relationship with russia, in order to meet putin's demands that we not move forward with that system, intended to defend against an iranian launch, we basically left ourselves open. so it is very important that we either succeed in these ran andtions with oui committed not to go forward with its nuclear weapons program, or that we go forward, if we fail to do that, with the initiative that i and eliot engel has authored, which is over and this is a, which would leave the ayatollah no choice but to compromise away his nuclear weapons program. notconcern is his comment

long ago that the icbm program is a responsibility of the military come and they need to mass-produce icbm's. what he isly, saying, because he is the chief heision-maker, what messages is sending to his military about ramping up icbm production and refusing to make that part of in --reement leaeves those who are worried about security with greatest concerns about the long-term intentions. he continues to say we are the great satan in the world, which would help if he calibrated this rhetoric a little bit. the greatttle satan, satan, and giving these attitudes that keep coming out of the ayatollah, yeah, we have security concerns there. >> one more from the and then we will go to patricia and john. that he ask you about the

refugee crisis on the border. we had rick perry here a little while ago, and he contended that during that session what was happening on the southern border was a failure of diplomacy by the united states in working with honduras, el salvador, and gautam moloch, a failure i the obama administration. is that a contention you agree with? you have a policy prescription of what obama should be doing about the crisis on the border? >> i suspect what the governor is referring to is the inability of mexico to block the quad guatamalan-- the border, and that is an area where we could work with the government in mexico in order to and inem develop -- order to pressure them, friendly, because that is the

other part of that equation -- pressure them to seal that border with guatemala, and also in guatemala and in honduras and el salvador, you have a circumstance where the political leadership there in the government is aiding and abetting this messaging, probably because it partly results in remittances to the 16-,t that these 17-year-old people, when the children get to the united states, the expectation is they will find themselves in the work force and that remittances will go back to those countries, and that is an advantage. astley, it is a pressure valve probably, also, in these governments, and these are largely dysfunctional governments to the extent that

the united states weighs in with pressure on these regimes and pushes for policies which are le, and also policies that do not encourage the citizens to make this very dangerous trek all the way up through mexico to the u.s. but there is other steps obviously that the administration should be taking, can be taking. one is the messaging in central that immigration fraud, those who commit immigration fraud, will be returned. these cases that we speak to our cases of fraud. when you are talking about the to thel intent provisions other the code to protect those who are trafficked for sexual abuse in the united states, the argument that that is going to blanketly cover all

whoral american children come over the border, that is not true, and the president needs to explain that to audiences in central america. they areefully, that not covered under that provision, and they will be returned. i think that type of messaging will go a long way to change the situation, which is compounding arithmetically. and that is an essential part of the solution. >> patricia? >> thank you. i would like to ask about iran, deadline coming up, and i wanted to get your view of a possible extension [indiscernible] how long of an extension you are comfortable with [indiscernible]

it had a have a question about -- and i have a question about - [indiscernible] i was not sure about the verbiage about the financial system [indiscernible] and some water nuclear sanctions -- some broader nuclear sanctions - [indiscernible] have 342 signatures on the house on the letter. again, it conveys the magnitude of the concerns of members of congress, members of congress need to be included in these discussions, and as you know, we went a year without congress being informed. is also on what the

iranians claim they will not negotiate on. one that i spoke to earlier was the icbm program, and when you hear the ayatollah call for a massive increase and say that it man'sry military responsibility to be involved in this huge stockpiling of it calls intom's, question why is that not part of the agreement? why are we not speaking to the issue of their insistence that they continue to be allowed to work on and ever more rapid development of supersonic centrifuges? want centrifuges that's been ever more rapidly, or if the iranian content is undetected nuclear breakout, then that tells us something about their state of mind.

even more so, the fact that they insist on taking this off the their the fact also that work on miniaturization of a nuclear warhead. iaea, thee where the international organization that monitors, wants access to that negotiations.ese heen them take several steps, we have seen them remove dirt from the site where the did their nuclear testing. then we see them bring in new earth in good measure after they knocked down the buildings. we have seen them asphalt the whole area, but there are still -- too reticent to allow the iaea to come in to check. the checks would file a the other agreements that they had had. if they aren't in the process of violating agreements, how willing are they -- remember

reagan's old adage, trust but verify --how willing are they going to be? we know the zeal for a deal. we have seen that before with respect to the north korean situation. and having gone down that road before, we want to make sure that this agreement is verifiable. yes, we are weighed in, and to your question about how long they will draw this out, my suspicion is that they are going to try to play for time, because as they do, they continue to enrich more and more. --ther authorization observation would be their demand at the end of the day is that the inspection sees after a years,of time, say, 10 and after that they are treated like any other power on the world stage. with that point, they could go forward without any oversight,

without any real ability for us rush tole to slow their weaponization. these are all questions that we are concerned about in congress, and this is the very reason why we passed our legislation into the senate. our suspicion was that if the senate could have taken that up, we would have had the necessary leverage to get the agreement needed, because we would have had the pressure with the wouldonal sanctions that force an agreement that was verifiable. >> would you agree to an extension? >> would we agree to an extension? agree, the whole problem is they are playing for time. we would have hearings on that. i would consult with eliot engel and the other members of the committee on this subject. we would have to see the details of what we are talking about.

but i suspect what i'm going to hear from the members of the committee is this is the very reason why we felt the administration, rather than just stop our legislation ithe senate, should have allowed it to go into effect because then the incentive would be not for the iranians to have an extension, but want to get a deal sooner than later, because of the cost on their economy. >> we will go next to john. >> thank you. mr. chairman, you have spoken about streamlining and overhauling the communications network, broadcasting. my question is twofold. [indiscernible] second, the bush administration placed a high priority on mock receipt -- on democracy building to the rest of the world, beginning with the president's second inaugural address and encouraging country to have a democratic system and have successive free elections.

and you have seen some success in the area. has the obama administration use ofned the ca democracy building? >> let's talk with the first question. right now the bbg is run by part-time or directors, and often cannot even find a quorum to do business. the concept in this legislation -- part of the concept is to radioadio free europe, free asia, and combine that into one institution, but to put it under a ceo. and to add to that, an advisory panel that would operate something like the ned, where input could be given on these ideals that i spoke to earlier. what is lacking in many of these societies is the foundation in an understanding of what we take for granted in the system of

ours -- freedom of speech, you know? the ability of people to feel secure that they can put out this idea of political pluralism, tolerance as a virtue. these were things that were warunicated during the cold into eastern europe very effectively. how do we know the difference between what would happen to societies that did not hear this message, because we have yugoslavia as an example. made in the was united states never to broadcasting yugoslavia, and i are member a young croatian journalist, younger than anyone here at this table, who said to me, all we had to listen to was the hate radio coming from the serbs, the hate radio coming the hate radio, coming from some of the bosnian stations, and he said if we

could have ever heard what was broadcast in czechoslovakia -- in czechoslovakia, at partition occurred, first they got their independence come in and they partition the country without the loss of one life, and he avel i listened to vaclav h talk about what he learned in these broadcast. i never learned in the of that. all i learned was hate. so at a time when russia is really ramping up -- for those of you that are listening to the conspiratorial series that come a time whenys, at china is also really spinning information, wouldn't it be good if people were grounded in what we know worked and did what created tolerance? point, before we get to elections as part of democracy, there's is a deeper foundation there in human rights. and i would start with that. i would start with this idea of of religiouse idea

tolerance, the ideal of allowing speech, andeedom of in these other more basic concepts. i would graduate gold poured, craddick -- i would gradually told toward democratic governance. i think if we do that there is a thirst for it. i listen to the broadcasts we do in china, and i listened -- because now we do it in a different dialects. i passed legislation some years ago to do this. they arean see that just starting to grapple with some of these best some of the foundation of what is really needed to create among the space,a desire for more for more in the way of rights. n, if weink, joh could do that, it would the administration to be supportive

of that in that way, i the our legislation will probably pass. we are getting a tremendous amount of support. i think we could probably get it through the senate. it would be good that the administration pay attention to it, and i have gotten a lot bipartisan support from those in the past who have been involved in this process of trying to communicate into the societies. i think it is inordinately important. but i think elections is just one note, is a spanish philosopher said, in this whole song of democracy, and it requires a much deeper understanding and it is an evolutionary process for a lot of societies. >> howard? aboutgressman, speaking the prospects for an iranian nuclear deal, you have mentioned a couple of times they need to get [indiscernible] how do you define that? what is a successful deal?

could that include new levels of enrichment? and also, you mentioned that years --have up to 10 [indiscernible] >> no, that is part of the deal. this is our concern. going beyond the question of we areent at a level - open on this question of the deal. remember that one of the preconditions in this interim agreement, what iran is saying, we will do this for a while, but 10 years out or whatever the time, and that has not been agreed to yet, at that point in time the deal is off. at that point in time we are no point subject -- at that in time we are treated like the netherlands, germany, or any

other country. and given the current behavior wethe regime -- remember, are dealing with a regime in which the executions -- for those of us that are concerned about this concept that the way in which a state treats its own citizens might tell us something about how it might treat others, we are dealing with a rouhani government in which the number of public executions have increase. for the religious minorities, this is a huge problem because the leadership -- and those who are taught teaching these other religions or involved in political action are being taken out and executed. and so the failure of the government currently in iran to adjust its behavior in terms of how it treats its minority populations gives us pause in much seriousness they are putting into these negotiations, especially when

the ayatollah keeps enunciating and rattling the sabers on this issue of mass production of icbm's and so forth. in this environment, yes, we want to see an agreement that we feel is verifiable and not inething just being done this zeal for a deal in order to say we are done with that problem, now we can move on. so i said i am open to the details of the negotiations. we are open-minded. but i am laying out for you our concerns and the totality of this will all be considered as this agreement comes back. >> bottom line-- >> i am trying to work with my committee and with the administration in a way in which we are open in this negotiation,

but at the end of the day, this has to be a serious negotiation that prevents undetectable nuclear breakout by the arriving in -- by the iranian regime. >> michael? what youed to hear could say about the supreme leader, and whether you feel that you understand him completely. his rhetoric is bellicose, and ts ofovokes that chann death to america. [indiscernible] members of congress do not talk to him. and he has shown flashes of pragmatism during his tenure. tohas allowed his country modernize in some ways. do you feel that you understand what is in his head, and do you think we are in essence kind of a form of total conflict with him, or do you think he is someone over the long term

we could trust? >> i had a conversation with a high-ranking official in china, a premier in china, on this subject, and as he said, we understand why you think that the end of the day, why america felt beijing -- what america felt moscow would be a rational actorld be an irrational with respect to the nuclear programs, why you felt beijing would be an irrational actor. we understand why you feel that iran might not be a rational actor. this is the question that goes to. this is a different kind of government, a different type of thought process. you i feel i understand the ayatollah? no, we do not understand him,

but this is why this old adage trust but verify -- we have to have a verifiable agreement and we are dealing with someone who has used the type of rhetoric that he has used towards the united states, and not just towards the united states. remember, this is a regime that has called for limiting israel from the map. my father reminds me, when somebody talks about eliminating 6 million jews, we do not have an excuse having gone to the history of what happened in the of ignoring940's that individual. and somebody says along the lines of what was put into "mein a race about eliminating of people, or in this context, eliminating israel, and in his mind israel is the little satan, we are the big satan. he has been very vocal about his animus toward other religions,

and especially towards a society that believes in freedom of religion like our own. and so in this context, it is wise to be able to guarantee the security of the west in these negotiations with iran. >> [indiscernible] revelationss on the of spying in germany -- are you worried about the [indiscernible] the u.s. posture is hurting relations with the country? i would like your thoughts -- >> i met yesterday with a delegation from germany on this and as you can see, with the decision to remove the station chief in germany, you can see how seriously this situation is taken in germany.

by the government. is that it would say germane wise for the elected representatives to the activities of their own intelligence services to the theth respect with respect to the issue, in terms of perspective. >> [indiscernible] i think i put it effectively. >> [indiscernible] >> yes. >> president putin is king off a tour of latin america. policy and on u.s. the sign of -- he has gone

before, but -- >> sure. i think with respect to president vladimir putin, i think that putin is very focused on the past. i had a chance to meet with him when he was vice chairman -- petersburg inst. the early 1990's, here in washington, d.c. and i think that he has a certain attitude about the united states that comes out of his feelings about the dissolution of the soviet union. realities is i do not think that attitude is going to change much.

it has been held for a long time. , what the questions is can we do to introduce other russians to information that is reliable so that the conspiratorial theories that are todayt in russian society and among russian-speaking populations in eastern europe, in the former soviet union where this is particularly present, is broadcast? this is an individual who over the last few years is now -- has now consolidated all information under his control. maybe one orto two newspapers left in moscow, virtually the entire country is governed by a communications system, radio and television, controlled by vladimir putin and his allies. thato can we recognizing

there probably will not be surprises here -- he will go to cuba and work with those hastries that he views as been confrontational with the united states, but what can we do to reach the next generation of russians so that they understand that the challenges that russia will face in the future, especially with respect to this radical jihad -- mine whoo friends of and i got to duma, know them on trips back and forth. and in talking with them, their focus is on the future, and what do they do about the virtual caliphate that is radicalizing young people -- they are muslim -- and in their state, this information that is coming in on the internet, their access to the internet, as well as imams

that are coming in and radicalizing youth, they whereis as an area russia and united states should be cordon mating a response to confront this problem and recognizing the true threats long-term to our societies. that is where a lot of our efforts should go, is speaking to duma members and others in russia's and society said that as this problem is and fight in southern russia -- and you can see what is happening in on almost a monthly basis now with serious attacks, and it is the local muslim community that bears the brunt of this, how could we work with russia on some of these very real challenges going forward? i wanted to shift to a different part of the world, and

speak to you about east asia. you have been very outspoken on mr. chairman, and it is sort of something that continues to dog relations between south korea and japan, and it is also an issue to the u.s. i wanted to get your thoughts on should each actions side take in order to improve relations generally and -- [indiscernible] >> early on before some of these latest statements came out of to thei conveyed inretary of state and others the administration the importance of getting ahead of this, because it was clear that abehin his political party

was moving in a direction of ofense nationalism that sort was reaching back and trying to rewrite the history of what happened during the occupation of entry, during the korean on korean occupation, during the second world war, and this would probably further ignite apprehension in korea come in china, and around the region, and that we had a lot of in termsound with abe of things we could work on, but that he needs to back away from this road on not just the -- issue, but also on some of these his politicalt party is making about japanese the japanesell and imperial army during the war. i think it is very unfortunate that he has gone down this road. i have spoken to him about it.

i have spoken to his cabinet members about it. and i have spoken to members of the japanese diet in order to privately convince them that raising these issues is interest in terms of japanese interests and frankly creates a tremendous amount of instability in the region. and our goal clearly is to make the region more stable. that will mean more economic growth. enormousates has interest. look at where the economic growth is happening in the next decade, this is the region, and this is very unsettling, and it is a flashpoint that we have to handle. quicktime check. we have 15 minutes left, and lots of people who want to ask questions. we will and at 10:00 in order to keep our deal with the chairman.

>> thank you. on syria [indiscernible] enough time [indiscernible] and that also on afghanistan, are you worried that the longer the election drags on it will be less likely that we might [indiscernible] first, on this issue of syria i give elliott angle of new york and armour's credit. three years ago government elliott explaining -- three years ago i remember how it explaining there were no foreign

isghters, there was no is interior. you have the free syrian army, representative of not just a diverse religious and ethnic groups, but it is attempting to hold the country together. so it in and support this. we had the french ambassador are doing the same thing. meeting after meeting, we conveyed this. i personally spoke to the president about this once, but on up throughout the administration, we have pushed for about three years' time to get support to the free syrian army. so now we are three years later, and we are talking about doing this, and in the meantime isis, the foreign fighters came in, they established this each head, and nothing was done to dislodge it. assad himself did not attack until recently.

he could be pounding them with the help of hezbollah and help from forces in iran. and at the same time they would have to contend with their bitteroperation -- opposition. frankly, we should taken the advice and supported that free syrian army early on. in terms of afghanistan and the elections, another area where we force, when they were pushing out the international observers in the second round, the united states should have been much more forceful. we should force an audit of the election. we should get the international community in there. we should not allow karzai to wave us off, because at the end of the day he is not interested in anything except for longing this. we need a quick resolution in

the election of the duly elected president to replace karzai in afghanistan. and then we can get the agreement. back to iran, kerry is going to vienna, but lavrov is not. there is an indication that there is a rift growing between united states and russia within the talks. do you know anything about that? >> no, i don't. about that rift, i do not. arehe people in moscow who saying that the united states are dragging its feet in the talks, that they are the ones were stalling. >> i can imagine they can believe anything in moscow, because it is a conspiratorial mindset right now in terms of the way they view the united states. i do not know that to be the case at all. congressman, thank you so

much for covering so much ground here. can i just drag you back. a few minutes ago it, it sounds like you've veered into saying that you had a private conversation with z-- >> i said the premier. >> and you were speaking quietly for a second. he was telling you that -- >> no, i was just explaining the view from china that they can believe why we can understand that iran is not a national actor in the sense that moscow and in a sense that aging and in the sense that washington, d.c., are rational actors. i have laid out our concerns, that hecknowledged could understand those concerns, and that is what he was expressing. >> thank you for doing this.

i want to take you back to germany. hadions over surveillance been brewing for a year. you think the administration could have been more to defuse this, and what can you tell us about their efforts? >> i do not know how much the administration could have done to defuse it. i know what we are trying to do with our discussions. >> do you feel the germans are being overly sensitive? >> obviously, as i stated -- as ihim a before the stated earlier, for the germans cast aspersions about this subject, i think elected representatives in germany should inquire about what the of their intelligence services are. i think it might put it inward perspective. >> the germans have been asking for some sort of [indiscernible] to show some respect to the

german people and the the same respect -- understand, but i do not know the details of those negotiations between the white house and the chancellor. so i cannot speak -- >> can you speak to what you think they should do? know, i think, given the circumstances, the administration is attempting, i think, at this time to deal with the german government, and i am hopeful that they are successful. >> thank you. >> thank you. another thing you said, i never have been able to wrap my head about the idea that the senate had to pass the men then this -- sanctions before we could approve the deal?

>> if they passed it, they overcame harry reid's support. you have had 2/3 in the senate. more than 2/3 in the house. where do we remember sanctions like this in the past? ronald reagan proposing sanctions for south africa. they were successful. what we have? cymer lumbers into -- similar numbers in the house and senate. and what happened because of the got sanctionswe on south africa. what were the consequences of that? not only the end of apartheid, but they gave back the nuclear weapon to the international community. they handed it over and said we cannot survive under the types of economic sanctions, and those were the types of sanctions each was in this the discussions, -- in this legislation, the sections which the former

secretary of treasury helped develop as a blueprint that we would need for north korea, if we ever imposed it, what we would need on iran in order to give them the choice but to compromise. >> doesn't that's just that the iranians do not know that congress is blocked the past patient, even though the house has passed the sanctions, 60 cosponsors have signed on. the administration is saying we cannot do it now, it might blow up the deal, but we will also oppose sanctions if the deal does go through. >> wait a minute, wait a minute. you are assuming everybody is as sophisticated as those around this table in the way that the political process works in terms of the house and the senate. all they see is where is the political will in the united states? if it passes and if it is vetoproof, it is then law. that is law and is something they have to pay attention to. if it does not, then that is

something they do not do with. we talked a little bit about the distance that the ayatollah has. is the ayatollah himself who is making the decision on this. he is the fellow who picked the half-dozen candidates who said they could run. rouhani was one of them. how much does he understand? there are either those types of crippling sanctions or the there are not. because of the opposition of the administration, that legislation did not go to the senate because we were just shy of the 2?/3 we needed. >> you were critical of giving -- legal rights, and now he has had an appearance before a judge him. what are you thinking about the trial? >> i was not critical of giving him legal writes. i was critical of was giving him the full legal rights that every

american citizen has. an enemy combatant i would argue does not have those full legal rights, including miranda rights. and in my view, mr. ka tallah, having been in full you and then a half-dozen interviews with major news networks, including some at this table, having done that in libya, some his his resort or his home, seaside home, being in foreign view for so many months, it would have been much more practical to take him into custody, they have him go to the do the thorough investigative process, which may have given us the leads to more of those involved in his terrorist network in libya. and so i think we missed that opportunity. second, i think transferring him

to trial to washington dc, -- washington, d.c., ideally you would transfer him to guantanamo bay. the secondary choice would be the southern district of new york where we would have the expertise to do with this, to have a relatively new prosecutor to this type of case and having it done in washington, d.c., i think is to lose opportunity to get information that could help additional terrorist activity, because in the past we --e able when we took table people into custody, and we interrogated them, we were able to get actual intelligence that better protected the security of the united states and our allies. >> do you think the administration's actions regarding the president of iraq are sufficient? >> have our actions been sufficient? no.

our actions in our dealings with the government in iraq have not been sufficient, and it was very necessary in the past for the united states to lean very heavily on the government, especially on maliki. if you were to point to one thing that has unraveled our ability of iraq as a cohesive it is theesist isis, decisions made by mr. maliki. awesomeously, he is so -- he has so ostracized the sunni and kurdish community, but on top of that his decision to go to the military -- he just put his son -- for those of you who saw that -- his son is now in charge of the military in iraq. he has gone to the officer corps and removed a competent officers and instead put in his friend. any of those friends have no takes brains whatsoever.

the troops have no confidence in the officer corps as a consequence of the decision to sack the senior officers. you have an individual here who go, andp down, who must you saw health the stony -- al -sistani, you saw the shia religious leader explained the necessity of an to stepping down, that is absolutely true. he has got to go, and then cohesively, the iranian state is a viable iran institution if you are inclusive with the different ethnic groups in the country. and religious groups in the country, it is very unfortunate that more pressure was not fun have throughout the process, and he has eroded the position of the iraqi state as result. >> two minutes left. a quick one?

>> the situation in israel, especially with the july 20 deadline coming up with the negotiations with a rand. is the situation in israel going to affect the iranian negotiations, or will it change what the catalyst is? >> i do not know if it changes our calculus, but there's one aspect of what is happening, and i saw this myself. i was in israel during the second lebanon war, and i was in haifa when these rockets were coming in. the question was, who was the enabler? who allowed hezbollah at that point in time to have the wherewithal to blanket that city? i was in a hospital, 600 victims and their. the answer was it was iran and it was serious. so in this circumstance, who is mas?enabler for ha where did they it does rockets?

the answer, iran. the fact that iran would transfer the longer-range rockets that could hit tel aviv and jerusalem and that they are firing them off, and the fact that they have gotten such a massive inventory, which is much how iran has put into this, that does raise the issue of how iran is a proliferator, right? so that is the other aspect of what we worry about a little bit when we are trying to negotiate with iran. how do you stop this penchant for proliferation, which they do with rockets and missiles and other types of ordnance? >> that is a nice and. thank you for doing it. >> thank you. thank you for the opportunity. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014]

[captioning made possible by wisn-tv] governors are in tennessee for their summer meeting. chair of the national governors association mary fallin. this is one hour 20 minutes.

>> thank you for being patient with us. one of the great benefits is to be able to work with our leaders from washington dc . our executive committee has had the religion of meeting with the president and vice president to how weout issues about can work together. the vice president has taken the lead on several administrative initiatives that require direct outrage in coordination with our governors. i've had several meetings with the vice president and other governors in the room. r governors in the room. is that direct conversation, the direct access that's been very beneficial to our individual states in helping us develop a better state and federal partnership. as the senator from delaware for 36 years, he is a leader on some

nation's most important domestic and international challenges. he served as chairman or ranking member at the senate judiciary committee for 17 years and chairman or ranking committee member on the senate foreign relations committee. and the 47th vice president of the united states, joe biden has continued his leadership on important issues facing the nation. the vice president was tasked with a mini the american recovery and reinvestment act at a time to which i know i personally called each and every governor to talk about the national economy and our state's economy. he also penny to draw on his foreign policy expertise, advising the president on a multitude of international issues. so ladies and gentlemen, it is our great pleasure at the national governors association to welcome the vice president of the united states, joe biden. [applause]

>> thank you all. please, please, please sit down. mary, thank you for the great introduction. as you stood, as you mentioned that i had the responsibility to implement the recovery act, and i got to meet with, speak with, multiple times as all of you, hey, how are you doing? [laughter] a lot of old friends. excuse me. and it reminded me of what lincoln and i used in the. it reminded me of what used to be like serving in the united

states senate. we actually liked one another than. we actually got along with one another. and deal with all of you has been one of the pleasures. i mean this sincerely, of my tenure as vice president. and saw a lot of you back at the white house not too long ago, and i want you to know that i want to thank, i want to thank bill for the passport to get back into tennessee. i appreciate very much. he said you here last week. hopefully you're not coming next week. no, he didn't say that. i was your last week actually. [laughter] but, you know, folks, i probably shouldn't say this, but -- [laughter] but then again, i'm joe biden. [laughter] [applause] as, no one doubts what i mean

what is a. sometimes i mean all that i say. but i mean this sincerely. i was thinking about this a lot the last, the last three or four weeks. the greatest honor of my life was to be united states senator and serve for all those years in the united states senate with some of the greatest, finest people i've ever known in my life. but, and i loved it. and there's always been very, very tough politics of in washington. i got there when there was still some of the old segregationist were still there, james eastland and a whole lot of other folks. but even in those days when i got there, and the politics was intense, ideological differences were real.

but it never got to where it is today. it was never personal. it was never cast in the context of you are good or bad. there was a presumption that the other guy or woman you were dealing with was acting in good faith. and governor bryant, you know, both your mississippi centers -- senators act is supported when i tried to get a nomination early on, and we had come on civil rights we were a thousand miles apart. and most importantly you didn't question the other guys motive. you really went after the judgment, you know, it was like hammer and tong fighting over so many fundamental issues. but it was always about a

judgment, not the motive. and the way things have gotten today, and i'm not singling out any party or in a group of people, just the politics, the culture in washington now. it's become too personal. it's too corrosive. and i was saying to peter earlier today that you folks, the democratic republican governors, are the best hope we have to bringing back an atmosphere where we can disagree without being disagreeable. where we can have significant ideological differences, but yet at the end of the day, it's all about trying to find a solution.

and granted, it always looked better from the outside than inside. but dealing with you for the last six years, you in an editorial says, the vast majority of you respect one another. the vast majority of you, i assume all but i don't know, the vast majority of you treat each other with respect. you are not dismissive of the other guys or woman's ideas. and you cooperate in ways that i find badly badly needed. you know, we are, excuse the editorial comment, we are only one country. we always do best when we act like that. and it's not the american people are divided. our politics is dividing them, the way we conduct our politics is dividing them. and so i look to you all.

we look to you. i think the answer is not just in terms of innovative things are coming out of you and not congress. it is also joined the ones of the greatest respect among those of us who are elected in your states, because you are about solving problems. i know, i watched my governor, i think is a great governor. i watch come we have real differences in delaware. i mean deep differences. that i don't, it doesn't get out of hand. it doesn't get out of hand. i watch martin. i know he operates in maryland. i know well. and so i guess what i'm trying to say is, and i'll get on with the business of the day here, but i've enjoyed working with you and i think you've got to lead this out. i think you've got to lead us out of this, this mess we are in. because you and i, we all know

the vast majority of people elected in the house and senate, oath parties, want to figure a way out. they know this is corrosive. when you have a national poll showing that republicans in congress have a 78% negative rating and a 14% positive, but the democrats are 65% or whatever, negative. this country can't run that way. we are the most heterogeneous country in the world. you and i know that in the next five years, those of us who are caucasian, you will be an absolute minority in the united states of america. we've got to get this right. so my editorial comment come we are looking to you. we are looking to you, and this will change. this will pass. but we've got to get past it a heck of a lot quicker than we

have so far. you know, and i think the old anglo expression, the proof of the pudding is in the eating, because of your cooperation and leadership, an awful lot of things are getting done. an awful lot of things are getting done. we had 52 straight months of private sector job creation, a total of 9.7 million jobs because working together, working with you and you with one another, you create conditions in your state that has brought more money off the sidelines. and you've sparked economic recovery in most of your states. matter -- manufacturers have added 600, 686,000 jobs in the past 52 months because working together, you made the needs of manufacturers a simple part of your state policies. diversifying your indeed resources, cutting the red tape, supporting emerging technologi technologies. they are democratic or republican ideas.

but you have done it. exports have increased to a record-breaking level for the fourth straight year, $2.3 trillion, with capital goods and and national supply leading the charge. nudges agriculture. there's always agriculture. then why is it happening? because of the conditions you provided in your states. you make it a priority at the state level to connect this is directly with international markets and opportunities. and many of you, many of you have invested in infrastructure maintenance to give products in your state to the rail lines, the ports, to the links of the world. according, i'm so tired of hearing people in both parties, but this is one part, although the more any other party about how bad off america is. what terrible shape we are in.

i have not traveled almost a million miles since being vice president. you will not find a single world leader in any country who would not trade places in a heartbeat with the president of the united states come to be president of this great country. not one. i challenge you to find me one. the states, the norwegian states, they are doing great, but they are part of the eurozone. there's a whole lot going on around the world. in 2013, i hit about how america is so far behind. one of the leading firms in america does a survey every year, and they do an international survey. and they asked the question, what is the country that is most

inviting of and most desirous of welcoming foreign direct investment? where do you want to invest your money? ladies and gentlemen, last year the united states once again overtook china for the first time in 11 years as the number one choice for foreign direct investment. 2014 survey came out, and begin the united states is number one. but here's the point. pulling away from the pack by the widest margin ever recorded in the history of this survey ever, ever. in every region of the world, in every economic sector, foreign investors see the united states as the best place to invest their money. ladies and gentlemen, simply put, we are in better position than any nation in the world to remain the leading economy for the 21st century. nobody else is close.

everybody talks to me about china. i know, i know president xi better than any elected official just because i spent more time with him. i traveled with him five days alone in china and the traveled for of the five days here in the united states. i recent came back for five a half hour meeting with him. i want china to do well, but china not only has a problem with energy, shortage of it, they don't have water. hear me? they don't have enough water. they have a divided population. they have to create 9 million new urban jobs every year just to stay current. they have to grow at above 10% per year to keep this bargain they have with an emerging middle class which is we will

let your economy grow as long as you let us stay in charge. so, folks, if you're ever going to be involved in the business we are all in, this is the time to be in. it's the opportunities are so immense. but each one of you governors know a note to maintain this advantage, continue to grow our economy, we have to stay ahead of the curve in investing into very important areas. much we can talk about today. mary, you and i talked about and we are about to talk about a lot. the first is infrastructure. and the second is investing in making sure we have the highest skilled workforce in the world. they are absolute basic requirements. basic requirements for us to be the leading economy in the 21st century. and on both scores, on both

scores we are way behind. we are way behind. you are the ones leading in your state. without much help from the united states congress. i know i'm preaching to the choir when i talk but importance of infrastructure. almost everyone of you in this room i've had private conversation with about a major infrastructure project in your state from a highway to report to a canal that would have a significant economic impact on your state, if you have the resources to be able to do it. these are the projects which would pull millions nationwide, billions of dollars off the sidelines, not just federal dollars, billions of dollars off the sidelines, creating a virtuous cycle of more efficiency, more productivity, more jobs in your state. i stood on the water's edge with the governor on ally and

governor haley -- governor on ally and governor haley discussing the need for modernizing out east coast ports. to accommodate these really new massive can. >> ships. i took several of my colleagues down to the panama canal to witness the construction. it looked like the great pyramids. they are gigantic. they will accommodate ships that are 160 feet wide. they are five and six stories high. they carry twice the cargo at half the cost. yet for a significant number of ports from the gulf of houston all the way up to maine, they can't birth in the sports -- in these ports. martin can tell you. governor haley can tell you. the state of georgia can tell you.

port of savannah, it accommodates 278,000 jobs in that state. i forget the number in maryland, but it's gigantic. and yet we are diddling. you are doing all you can. you are attracting investments. the federal government is sitting on its hands because they can't get the so-called worker fell through and they finally got to overtime to figure out how to allocate those funds. i walked with governor quinn along the mississippi river, talking about the critical connection between rail lines, highways and waterways. and i sat with governor cuomo in albany as you laid out a remarkable upgrade in new york's power grid, bridges, tunnels that are being rebuilt in the

wake of say in the. but being rebuilt to a higher standard, not being rebuilt to the status quo, to a higher standard. going beyond fundamentally rethink and reinvent the states infrastructure in the 21st century. one of the primary responsibilities of the federal government regard to infrastructure is to provide the seed money for the infrastructure. all the way along for the beginning we have done this. the first national road was built by the congress in 1808. you had the governor in new york named dewitt clinton built a thing called the erie canal, generate in those days millions of dollars off the sideline. connecting the east coast with eventually to the west which at the time was ohio. interstate highway system,

folks, you know that manufactures locate where they can access modern railroads, highways, ports, airports, canals to get their products to market more efficiently. you can make them at the same price in hong kong, the united states, that you can ship them to market 25% faster and 40% cheaper, where are you going to go build your widgets? and manufacturing is coming home in droves. why? because we are the cheapest energy in the world now. has we have can we protect intellectual property. with the court system that adjudicates and disputes fairly. we have the most productive workforce in the world. that's not my judgment. that's just an outside group, three times as productive as chinese workers. how long are they going to stay?

imagine i if governor kasich, io know if he's here, i just don't seem, from ohio, he can tell you project we built that he ended up building, but the railroads built in east baltimore, ohio, connecting, it is a gigantic switching station that makes the chicago stockyards of the old days look like it small. really. it's 100 acres sitting out in farmland, but they will have double-decker trains, i mean, be able to double stack boxes, boxcars, containers, taking all the stuff westinghouse is making, and carrier, and all the rest and the old manufacturing and they will get to the port of baltimore one quarter of the cost, three times the speed. what we are doing, what you are

doing is we're widening tunnels so the stress can go through with a double decks on on them, switching yards are changing. it's kind of a profound impact. tractate transportation system is today, and i know you know all this, more than 52 million tons of goods worth nearly $46 billion every single day. almost 40 tons of freight per person per year for everyone who lives in america. that's only going to grow. what about the rail system? is a growing anywhere near proportion? what we need now, let alone, let alone, we are going to need. big debate, you know this in alabama is whether not you've got to slow down rail freight because it's too dangerous.

you've got to move it at higher speeds. it ain't the rail car, gov. it's the rail bed. but you all know, today's infrastructure is instead prepare. the american society of civil engineers says we need $3.6 trillion, with the key, and investment in infrastructure by the year 2020 to maintain, to maintain our needs. yet we only and best 1% of our gdp in infrastructure. we write 28 -- we rank 28th in the world among advanced nations in investment in infrastructure. looks as though the congress will do a short-term extension of the highway trust fund anyway, and by the way, you all deserve the credit. ..

>> the governor of the state of new york said it. , put you in laguardia airport and drop you in an airport in beijing, blindfolded at 4:00 in the morning.

when you are in beijing and you think you're in the united states, you should be. when you are in some airports, you will think you were in another place. why is that? what are we doing? what are we doing? be -- andture used to i served for 36 years -- used to be the only fully totable bipartisan issue there was. was. when that all of a sudden our memories go dim? the plan we've put forward were open to other suggestions related to that was a plan that existing taxes, closing tax loop holes and rewarding companies, that reward companies for going

overseas. there may be other combinations. this is the way you pay for it. in the investment infrastructure will create millions of middle-class jobs and generate economic growth. i don't know a single governor in any political party no matter how far left or right you are who doesn't want a job that yout you can raise a middle-class family and it saves you a lot of problems. you get a choice between a job that is a minimum wage job and a job that someone can make a decent salary and benefits it is the best thing to contribute to your economy regardless of your politics almost every one of those infrastructure jobs are just that. none of them are minimum-wage jobs. and you all know better than anyone else the incredible ripple effect of infrastructure

projects. it means jobs at the end down the supply line in every business and communities in the states. that's how you build up the economy. that's how we built it in the past. in addition to the infrastructure, it is critically important that we have the most advanced highly skilled workforce in the world. and madam chair that you and the nga ha have been in the forefrot of this. you've been focusing on the workforce investment and i believe that without your help congress wouldn't have passed the workforce innovation opportunity act. again, you did it. because of your work and leadership you've been able to reestablish a bipartisan consensus on the workforce innovation and the opportunity is worth investing in because prior to this all these programs were worth less. let's cut them all out.

that was the one argument going on and the other one was it's not going to have to change. well, no. but there is a need both for significant reform as well as a significant investment. the act that just passed increases funding levels by 17% and eliminates 15 programs and increases the accountability to make sure the programs are getting the job done. that is how many workers as the program placed. how much are those workers earning? are they on the job six months later? because if they are, the program is and worth it and we should apply standards to it, that we should have the program, programs that provide flexibility that you ask for in your discussion with me and my staff as well as the hill by

allowing the funding to be used because you know better than anybody else to train people already on the job so they can improve the skills an their skip the career ladder. i'm probably the most accessible vice president in a long time just because i get to go home. i still ride amtrak. and i go home. i go through your train station more than you do. [laughter] but here's the deal, what do you heahere at home? more people are getting jobs. if those people had jobs that had been totally stagnant for the last two, four, six years you figure it out. you talked about the need to invest in people with jobs now to increase the capacity so they could move in addition to those

who are unemployed but we still have a lot more to than just passing the act because it is absolutely necessary we have that skilled workforce to maintain the 21st century. that is a given. by the end of this decade more than six out of every ten jobs are going to need a form of postsecondary education whether it is a bachelors degree or associate in some form of program and manufacturing facility. there are over 100,000 manufacturing jobs in the nation sitting empty because they can't find a skilled workforce to meet the job. go to the stat state and wisconn and you've been working on this. they open a big new plant and find out they work with the local community college and

bring the machinery and off the floor into the community college and bring their own managers into the community college with some help from the federal government through our program train these folks. i think a player i up there it 8 week program. don't hold me to the exact number but it's like a conveyor belt. salaries are $850 if memory serves me correctly. by the end of the decade, the boston consulting group which is ahead in the last ten years estimates the number high skilled manufacturing jobs needed in the united states will be an additional 875,000 a lot of them are sitting empty right now but by the end of the decade we need 300,000. we have done an extensive survey since the president asked me to

take on this responsibility to come up with the new job training initiative. 300,000 more software developers are going to be needed. you know what the average salary is in today's stock dollars? $87,500 average salary. we need 12,000 more computer network support specialist salary is. they are the folks in the companies were in your offices that keep your systems running in-house. average salary, $59,000 a year. we need to have a million more nurses. average salary, $65,000 a year. we need 30,000 more physicians assistants. average salary, $91,000 a year. we need 10,000 more petroleum engineers average salary,

$130,000 a year. you don't have to tell the folks from oklahoma and texas and many other states about that. by the end of the month i'm going to deliver to the president and all of you with an extensive job training strategy that has attempted to meet these needs. many of the strategies are directly from the conversations. the path to the employment is to create more partnerships between employers and the community college and nonprofit organizations. what have you done up their? it works. the president's job council put together the, quote, right skills now program. the governor in nevada has done a hell of a job with this. you really have. you've taken an idea and you've

made it work. you've got employers which makes the planes, ships, trains. is that the correct pronunciation in the community college? the master curriculum. he came in and told them what you need it. you set it up for them and the department of labor whatever it is in question you put them together and these are good jo jobs. my buddy in new hampshire had a great program that provides on-the-job training for companies that higher unemployed workers directly into open positions and train them while they are in those positions because they got the high-tech stuff up there already. watch them put it in action. there was one that was an engineer and guess what. he had worked as an engineer for a large company for 31 years.

he was about 54 or 55-years-old. he had all of the skills. but he couldn't afford not to have a job to go back to school so they would have this on-the-job training program and it works. it's not a panacea but it makes a difference in all of you because you have to walk out of your offices through the capital out through the door and people see you every day you don't get in the car and go taken through a gate. one thing i never worry about anymore i used to be worried about traffic congestion but there is none in america. i don't know what happened. you've talked to ordinary people, you walk outside. you see them.

what do they talk about? this is one person and one job at a time, one opportunity at a time. and many more of you have successful programs in if i had an opportunity to go through them all because i know where i've been quite frankly you've been really cooperative in this outfit to give us all your best ideas of what's working in your state and what things are not working in your state but that's why we have invested nearly $2 billion in partnerships between businesses, community college and the result is real. the certificate degree programs designed by the employers who will hire the students when they complete them. that's why you we invested $100 million in the competitive grant program to bite the h1b visa program where silicon valley and other firms said they can't find enough coal fired employeecola fiveemployees in ts and the other certificate brings folks over. it's the h1b program.

was there a way to increase the apprenticeships and they pay a fee for that as well so that's how a lot of this gets paid for two expand such as information technology. of the largest companies in the world cisco, everyone was there. i asked i said right now there are -- you will remember this in the senate we have to vote on the visa. there are 550,000 this year or it's been over 480 to 580,000

per year. they don't have the jobs in the high-tech industry and there is a whole thing they have to go through to prove that nonetheless, 555,000 h. one b. visa holders this year. so i asked this group of the 20 leading high-tech firms in the world. how many of those jobs can be filled by americans with a two-year degree high community college degree? the answer was 200,000 per year. what are we doing? 200,000 a year. i met with these folks and they are helping me put together a program. they are helping to train and encourage more individuals to

become computer programs. you are talking 85, $90,000 a year. a two-year degree. imagine if we could train 200,000 programmers who qualify for these jobs. the average salary is 87,000. almost 90,000. so here's what this outfit has done. they are helping k-12 kids tea teach. they help schools create and expand computer science curriculum. last year 15,000 classrooms in america began teaching the curriculum. they also encourage all of you in the states into some of you have already done it to a lower your schools and talk to the local school districts to allow

two counts the classes as part of high school math requirements. you realize less than 1% of high schools do that now? for example in the past year they successfully lobbied oklahoma, illinois. i don't know how it went. arizona, new york, california, idaho all of whom have recently added computer science as a core subject receiving state funding. they are making it feel accessible. for example this year code.org encouraged americans to code for one hour on the websites 30 million americans participated. 30 million. heck of an initiative. all of you know what i know.

americans want to work. they are willing to work creatively are willing to be re- trained. if they think there's any possibility of having to re- trained to be connected to a job come help them to better themselves and their families that spend the big problem in all of our state and federally. i've talked to some of you about this. connecting the job opening. you hear these statistics 100,000 high-tech jobs. when i go out there the kids i grew up with and those that grew up with their children where are those 100,000 jobs flex do you have a list? tell me where they are. how do i get them, what skill do i need? in the free market they are required to get the jobs and the people that need the jobs.

many of you have done a lot of this stuff. i met with a company called glass door. they are collecting and sharing additional information they have the stores into stores of information. so now what they have on the website and you are looking for a particular kind of job. in the interview process and the culture of the data that is elected in a country so for example if you want a job as a software developer you can go to the glass door and let other glass door users have said about what it's like to work for her interview with that company for that job. on traditional websites you find

the posting of the basic salary information. currently glass door partnered with more than 1,000 college universities to give access to the sites. they helped me put together an event at the white house that was called the data jam and with 24 high-tech firms. some of whom have already connected with some of your departments of labor to make it clear for the jobseekers what jobs are needed, number two, where you can get the skills. number three how can you get to help pay for those skills and with those skills are and where you can use them to get a job. i sat at a table there were 24 outfits that said they had different tables set up in the white house in the oeb and i sat with a representative company that said i want to show you something. and they said i not allowed to tell you their name but it's in the hometown of delaware works

at the port of wilmington and he said he's out of work. so he wanted to know where else he could get a job as a warehouse. so they pushed a button and every single warehouse job within three hours popped up in every single warehouse job in the entire east coast popped up. they had a map showing the density of the jobs and showing that there is a lot of openings in the eastern part of the state in western pennsylvania. very few and not as many in southern delaware etc.. they also show you live in% of warehouse workers when they lose their job they don't know what they are qualified for. i've been working in the warehouse. well it turns out the same skills that require the warehouse worker qualify you to be a truck driver. so you push a button and get every single solitary truck driver opening that is in the

same region. truck drivers make on average $4,000 a year more than warehouse workers. $45,000. they then say with the skill set is, what the expense and experience is required, what the expense is to get the training that you need. they actually give the workers a physical map showing them where the company is, telephone number and a map as to how they can get the training they need for the job. they already had a career. they've now lost it and most people you know are in their 40s or 50s or lost a job. what is the first thing you hear from them? they talk to you like they do me. i don't know what to do. i've done this my whole life. i used to have a friend that was

a great basketball player. i don't want to give away my age but i will. he went to providence college when they had all americans in all-pro and the nameless pete maclachlan. died of throat cancer, good friend of mine. he would say to himself he wasn't the sharpest on the table but he was a smart guy and he used to have an expression. he would say you have to know how to know. let me say it again. you've got to know how to know. those of you that went to law school what i but is the first g you have to learn? you have to learn how to access the information that you need. it's called legal procedures you spend a whole year learning. you need to know how to know. so many hard-working decent americans they don't know how to know. they don't know where to go and

they are intimidated when you tell someone 51-years-ol 51-yeat has lived a middle class life you're going to go back and be re- trained. it's intimidating, but it's there. let me end where i began. every single one of you knows and i know the way america was built was on the back of the most modern infrastructure in the world. you also know as well as i do americans want to work. america was built on the shoulders of those people. the world is changed. it's more complicated. it's more global. the skills required to succeed our sophisticated but our population is thoroughly capable and requires the skills and thriving in this new world. every one of you know the american people are tough. they are determined. they want to work. the american people have -- this

is a reality. they have never, never, never let america down to giving have a chance. ordinary people never -- we have to give them a chance. and in the process of giving them a chance, we do everything from lower our deficit to increase our productivity to enhance our place in the world, but to have to know where the jobs are and what training they need and how to get the training that our responsibility. our responsibility to do both of these things, to break through the gridlock in washington and rebuild america and breakthrough the complications that tens of americans still face in terms of how to advance their career. i think if we do both of these things there are things we have

to do. ladies and gentlemen the american people are ready to work. throughout the history when given a fair shot, they have never, ever let the country down. i will conclude by telling you that when i was in china after we had been downgraded because of that ridiculous showdown in the last administration between democrats and republicans and the rating was downgraded and i got to -- i was in china two days later. actually that's not true, four days later for a five-day trip. and then the president hu welcomed me in the great hall of the people.

there were a thousand people in there and more press than i have seen because they were grateful. we have been downgraded and the prospects look a great deal better by comparison. >> the president was very gracious and he said through the contemporaneous translation we have faith in you. we know you will come back and they went through the whole thing about what you have to deal with and he listed our problems and i said thank you mr. vice president so much. i said i've noticed i've read that you are getting a lot of criticism for buying millions of dollars worth of the u.s. treasury bills two or three days after we were downgraded. i said if i were you and my international staff nearly die i said if i were you i wouldn't buy any more u.s. treasury bil bills. we don't need you to do that. it's true you 02% of the

financial instruments. that's true. that 86% are owned by the american people. there's never been a default on the data so i know what is causing you some political difficulty so i wouldn't buy any more. it's okay. i then set by the way we do have a problem with our what we refer to as the entitlement system you call it and we call it social security and medicare and medicaid. we do have a problem but ours is a political problem lacking political will. but i said my god mr. president, if you need help i don't know what you are going to do with your one child policy creating the disaster that has occurred. by 202 2025 people have 2025 yoe working to take care of all of the people retired.

if we can help in any way, we will. you may remember i came back and predicted a change on the one child policy. one year later they did. my generic point is to take advantage of this opportunity. take advantage of the opportunity for the united states to lay down a new marker for the 21st century. we have the greatest research university in the world. we have the most incredible system for allocating capital in the world. we have more venture capitalists ready to go in any place in the world. we have a greater -- it goes on and on. so what i am pleading with you to do is to continue to teach us a lesson by getting along with one another. continue to do the practical things that you are doing to

demonstrate the use two issues are not partisan issues. they used to be a national consensus on both of them. the sooner that we reestablish that consensus, the faster we are going to grow and create real jobs and we are going to continue to lead the world in large part because of all of y you. [applause] i'm not hanging around for applause. i'm supposed to take questions. i'm sorry. >> we appreciate your time and we know you have a very busy

schedule. we are going to take a couple of questions. we look forward to having that sign but how would that legislation affect the current work on the training programs. the bottom line is that will enhance it. it's the bare minimum because we should measure objectively whether the program is working. it should be applied to everything in my view. those of you that work with me in the act the first time we did that is when we had less than one and a half% of waste, fraud and abuse according to the outside groups so there should be an objective matter to be the measure whether these programs are worthwhile.

by example, back in the 70s when the shipping industry began to leave the united states, my state of delaware and the state of pennsylvania boarded one another obviously, and there is a building corporation major corporation right down the delaware pennsylvania border along the delaware river and it went belly up and consolidated left and lost their jobs so we had a job training programs. program. we trained 14,000 cooks. nobody needed any cooks. it was a job training program but it was almost a makework program and so as the reform secretary governor o'malley out of secretary of labor says we have to not train and hope we have to train and place. so one of the additional things that we have to do our make sure that we are able to connect the

actual business openings that are there with the people who want t jobs and then figure outf they don't have the skills how we can get them the skills that meet the needs of those employers. this bill doesn't -- that bill doesn't do that. it does some of that. but i could go on for longer but i've already gone on for too long area that's why in the budget we have left over of the 5 billion this year, 2 billion to increase the number of apprenticeship programs for something that is being done well in south carolina and is being done well in a lot of your state. to figure out and encourage the best outfits in your states that are really willing, ready and able to get into the business of hiring people in a lot of them

are. they have the capacity for training the workforce needed to fobefore the jobs require new skills just because of the globalization and modernization. by the way it will not be one of those, those that know me and do like governor nixon, there is no pride of authorship. i'm hoping that you all are going to say i like that part or i don't like that part. this will be the comprehensive look quite friendly ever and we will see we will be able to do that. mr. vice president, those as you may well know that states use

workforce programs to not only attract to help our existing businesses grow. but for that to be really successful they have to be able to work with those businesses and be responsive to them. how could the job workforce programs be doing and serving in and listening and responding to the businesses how can the governor's help worked better? they don't know how to listen. whether it is the community colleges or the colleges or the training programs. that is the basic blocking butp it's hard. i don't want to keep talking about my buddy in vermont, but the high-tech nonprofit up there

with other companies in a very precise way. they have all of the needs and companies not only in vermont, but in the area then they went out and they looked at all of the total unemployment in the state they tried to match the skills and started putting people back together. when you are a state like mine you are the only state by the way before you pick on little delaware, five of you all are smaller than we are. [laughter] we are looking to use, the