domestic and international processes differ, and how it differs for oil and gas and other infrastructure. here we are going to look at the nuts and bolts here it will all come together and why we are where we are. adam? >> i am the legislative attorney with sierra. my role here today, as many of you know, is to give you an idea why we are here, what the federal role is with respect to why the state department is supposed to dutch some of the other agencies will tell you what it should be. for those of you who do not know, oil pipelines are generally not a federal matter at all, unless federal lands are involved. so, how did we get here? know, the proposed keystone project would cross an international border. if the pipeline started at the the federalder,

government would not be involved. washington would not know about it at all. but it is required that the state department pursue it -- not any statutory framework, but a series of order starting with presidents, starting in the 1950's. most recently executive order 10 42 three was amended by the executive order reference in the first hour, executive order 113 -37. those orders designate the secretary of state to "receive all applications for presidential permits for the construction, operation, or maintenance at the borders of the united states for facilitating transportation of petroleum products to or from a foreign country."

just athe review is border crossing, the fact that the state department involved, allows the state department to review the environmental policy. a key to understanding the legal framework is to note that these are standing executive orders and they were not issued pursuant to a statutory grant and authority. congress did not legislate to create this permitting framework we are on now. instead, past presidents created this permitting requirement pursuant to what they saw as constitutional authority. the constitution does not expressly accord the president or the state department the responsibility for reviewing permit applications. however the president's recognized authority in the era of foreign affairs permits them to take action in affairs of

foreign commerce. that has been an issue of some controversy. clintonlub versus challenged the secretary of state's permission to authorize a pipeline from alberta, canada to wisconsin. it sounds familiar, i am sure. they argued that the president did not have legislative authority, as i just discussed. court responded that it does not arise from a delegation of authority, but rather from the authority over matters of foreign affairs. and he district court agreed. similarly -- i'm going to mess this up -- so apologies in advance.

a similar decision. the plaintiff tried to suspend or revoke a presidential permit issued under executive order 133 keystone pipeline, the predecessor to keystone xl. violated theat it national policy procedure act. thecourt found that president would be free to disregard the court's judgment, as the case was considering the president's and eric constitutional authority to conduct foreign policy, as opposed to a statutory authority granted to the president by congress. thus the decision-making process in that case not -- was not subject to challenge, as would be the case under normal administrative framework. however, the sluggishly does not mean the president's constitutional authority to isulate boarding crosses

explicit. in both decisions the courts made a point to note that the executive branch's unilateral authority was in the absence of legislation permitting these border crossings. in seroquel, the court pointed out that congress has not attempted to exercise exclusive -- in sierra club, the court pointed out that congress is not attempted to exercise exclusive decision in this case. in the other decision, the court noted that the president's soul authority to permit border crossings is because congress has failed to create a regulatory scheme for the pipeline. that is what you see the piecemeal approach to permitting that caused robinson -- problems nebraska. where does this lead us? we have the secretary of state reviewing oil pipelines, like

this one here. we know the orders and decisions made to the executive branch pursuant to those orders have been found to be a legitimate exercise of the president's power to administer foreign affairs. however the courts have recognized that congress has the authority to enact legislation to supersede this framework if it so chooses. with that in mind, i will turn it over to my colleagues, who i think will ask us congressional efforts to do just that. >> over to you, ben. >> thank you. my name is ben lieberman. i work for the house energy and commerce department. i do not think it will surprise any of you to note that there will be a keystone bill in 2015. i should add a caveat. we have not lamed anything. only -- we have not claimed anything. so i can only guess, but i think be a keystone bill

fairly early in 2015. for one thing, there is no need for additional fact-finding. scaryf us see the at this point. and since this project is strongly supported by the american people and congress will reflect that support. we have seen all of the polls. it is worth noting, at this point all of the arguments that made,be made have been and have gotten a fair share of attention. the needle has not budged too much on the american people's support for the pipeline. what would a new keystone xl bill look like? i think it will look like our , northern approval

act. it will probably eliminate the need for a presidential permit for keystone xl and deem the environmental impact statements sufficient for all legal purposes. it also take steps to take -- take on additional delays to read we would not want to support years of white house delays with years of judicial delays under various statutes .rom anti-pipeline activists the goal of the statute would be to pass something that could get the pipeline built fairly early -- or it underway fairly soon. that it would be more bipartisan. the keystone bill has gotten some craddick support. but i think we have something of a breakthrough with another bill, hr six, the lng export

bill, which was a somewhat controversial issue. on the republican side, we introduced a bill. and number of democrats said, we can agree with this in concept, but we want changes made. we worked through with this and came up with an amended bill that passed 46 and amended votes in favor. continue thatcan bipartisan support -- approach into next year. happen if the senate turns republican? .n one sense, it did not change already, there is probably majority support for keystone xl, although not necessarily the 60 votes necessary, certainly .ot the 67 to override a veto

what changes it now? the senate would be able to bring a keystone bill to a vote, and that would also bring in a number of strategies. for example, could a keystone bill be attached to a must pass spending bill. that would be horrible to vote no one. all of these things can happen if the senate turns republican. if it stays democrat, i think we will see more of the same. senatese voted and the disposes. that raises the question, what would president obama do if the keystone bill were to reach him? i think most people would presume he would vote no based on what he said about keystone. it is worth noting the president has never categorically said he would oppose keystone. he has always had a specific

reason at the time for opposing keystone, for what ever that is worth. we see keystone xl as part of a larger trend. as we all know, there is tremendous growth in oil and gas production in the u.s. and north america and there is a tremendous need for infrastructure to keep up with that growth, including projects, including u.s.-mexican border projects. we can take a look at larger process reforms. essentially, in a nutshell, what this bill does -- it removes the additional layers of steps triggered by a border crossing , the oil sands in north dakota. that is my hypothetical. would've the oil sands were in

sandsa -- what if the oil were in montana? it would still be subject to a environmental and safety reviews. but there would not be the added step of a presidential permit and the national interest determination because the executive orders we discussed. we would streamline are possibly even eliminate the need for a presidential primary -- a presidential permit just because the project happens to crossing national border. process billsse are a part for many keystone bill, but we also will probably be looking at these larger process changes that would help

build the north american energy infrastructure that we need. thank you. >> thank you. stephen? i appreciate the opportunity to appear on this panel. i have spent most of my legal career representing pipeline companies, including on cross-border projects like keystone. neither my firm nor i have had relationships with the se, so allpeline per of my comments will be from an outsider point of view. i do want to talk about the he tells of the process that ben was just talking about, how pipelines do get approved. i thought the journalist was showing you how interesting it could be. my job is to show you how tedious it can be. hopefully we can rise above the tedium.

we can do that by contrasting and comparing the processes you go through if you are trying to develop a gas pipeline, a domestic oil pipeline, and then third, what is different about having to build a cross-border oil pipeline like keystone? tohink that will illuminate some extent why we are in the situation or why keystone is in the situation they are in. let's start with national asked pipelines. national gas pipeline is regulated by the federal energy regulatory commission, an independent agency within the department of energy. five commissioners appointed by the president. they operate on their own. it is basically a nonpartisan agency. is very well defined. there are clear timetables. there is a clear process.

through theg application and approval process. only considers public interest issues, but it is also the lead agency for the environmental review, meaning it takes the lead among all of the agencies are affected, and gathering information and determining the environmental a project. you come away with a certificate that basically allows you to build the pipeline. it overrides all of the state and local regulations that might have otherwise impeded getting it built. rc also takes care of eminent domain. when you have a ferc

certificate, you have an -- eminentmain domain pipeline certificate. it is basically one-stop shopping. that is domestic. if it crosses international borders, as a couple extra steps. one is you have to go to the department of energy for approval of the import of the natural gas itself. that is usually a pro forma process. and you are required to get a presidential permit for your pipeline. but the difference between gas alsoil is the ferc considers your presidential permit application as part of , andwhole review process they issue one decision that includes both the decision on an environmental impact and the decision on granting these certificate, the decision on granting the presidential permit. a pretty well-defined

and smoothly functioning, by and large, process. pipelines, aoil pipeline that carries liquid hydrocarbons as a core two natural gas, we have an entirely different regime. the first and most important hasg about that is the ferc no role in the approval and citing of an oil pipeline, whether it crosses an international border or does not. that outly confirmed of a decision from a pipeline in north dakota. the commission said in its order, we have no authority to approve or disapprove these pipelines for sale. all we can do is rule on issues regarding what rates will be when he goes into service. because there is no federal law requiring approval for the building of the pipeline, that is now open entirely to the states. the states play a fairly

prominent role in the building of oil pipelines. some states have very detailed procedures for approval of oil pipelines. alaska, minnesota, california. they usually assign it to a regulatory agency within the state. they can hold hearings and gather evidence. it can be a fairly lengthy process. some states have permits, but only if they pipeline exercises eminent domain in that state. illinois isn't example of that. in order to have eminent domain in illinois you have to have a certificate from the illinois commerce commission. most do not, either because there are no oil pipelines across the state, or in southwest states, they seem not to be concerned about building thenines, or other

specific environmental permits required. there is some federal involvement, because to build a pipeline, you likely crossover federal lands, natural forests, that sort of thing, or navigable waterways. in either case, you are going to have to get her meds from various federal agencies to do that. those, thessing federal agencies involved and not look at the entire pipeline project. i typically look at just where you are crossing the waterway or the federal lands. you look at the impact of that on its own and there is no overarching environmental review is what we're seeing in the keystone case. and finally, there is safety regulation. the department of transportation -- it regulates pipeline safety, and if you are building a pipeline project, if it is more than $2.5 billion, a require you to come in and seek prior approval for construction and design.

if it is less than that, they still encourage you to do the same thing. there is no one federal agency like the ferc looking at this project. piecemeal money basis. what changes if you take your pipeline in the u.s. and extended into canada and now it is crossing international borders? just like domestic violence, the federal energy wrigley jory commission is not involved at all. it is the department of state, as has been discussed many times, that leads this process. they act not only with respect to the finding of national interest, which is a requirement to issue the presidential permit, but also the lead agency for the environmental review, which is a somewhat unusual role for the state department to have. agencies like the ferc or the army corps of engineers go through hundreds of these reviews every year.

the state department is probably done a handful in the last five or 10 years. it is somewhat an unusual role for state. process, therc presidential permit process does not preempt state law. states still have citing and approval for the routing of pipelines, which we have seen with nebraska. and the presidential permit does not give the pipeline imminent domain authority. so, a pipeline being built across the border may get his presidential permit. it still has to go through all of the process of acquiring right-of-way and permits along the route. it is somewhat the worst of both worlds. you get the full review process only it ferc would do, is being performed by the state department, and you're still subject to every hurdle in every would be locality that true of the domestic oil pipeline. given that description, i think it is fairly clear why this is

somewhat of a uniquely challenging process for pipelines that want to go across the border and why there are so many opportunities for pipelines to get derailed in that process. having said that, the process can work. there are multiple pipelines that carry oil, actually in both directions. have recently been permitted. it is not an impossible process. as some have pointed out, i think that keystone became a symbol much greater than the reality of the project and the process has really stretched out. >> ok. what is the role of the public in any step of this? there have been public submissions, public hearings. do you have to have them? what do have to do with the submissions when they come in? how can that affect the process

question mark >> certainly the state department has public which areriods, required. they also get comments from other federal agencies. they are required to consult with other designated agencies. the department of defense, for example. they are required to get the views of the environmental protection agency. and in fact the environmental reduction agency has weighed in several times, criticizing the state department environmental impact statement, asking for more information, that kind of thing. i think one of the journalist commented later -- earlier. you look at the executive orders, they are two pages long. the state department regulations are not as detailed as the environmental review regulations that other agencies. a lot is left to discretion. to point outrtant

-- the public can be heard on the local and state level, much more than they could write a natural gas pipeline. gas pipeline.l that avenue is much more open in this case then it interstate gas pipe. >> can the local people stop that? today --ies from state to stay. with nebraska, with the recent was previously to go for the public service commission. the public service commission would hear public comment, only there you would assume there would be a much more local -- first of all, there would be a localwer voices and focus. i do not know if it was explained in the first hour. the nebraska legislature decided to supersede the psc's jurisdiction and allow parties to go to the governor directly.

that is what the litigation is about. some states let the public voice be heard through elections. and there are some states -- would vary from state to state as far as what the processes for public input. >> cindy? wait for the microphone please. >> my understanding is they do not supersede the law because it was not in place to apply to the northern leg of the pipeline. is not why this lawsuit representative or indicative of the process, because that was passed well after the keystone application. that is when they rerouted the route. through thessessed governor and the environmental agency in nebraska.

that is when the lawsuit became more pertinent. it did not exist -- >> yeah, right. -- i wantompare this to delve a little bit deeper into the difference of what is going through the pipe, but also let's take an existing pipeline that has been permitted. if you want to change what is going through there or change the direction of the flow, what is involved? eastnada was to do energy and rely on the port of portland, what happens there? >> well, it interestingly, depends on what the presidential permit says. document, aual piece of paper that the president signs.

the pipeline will have conditions. i have looked at them. they are not -- this is not a form document. document for your has requirements written into it. load it isify the carrying, the maximum capacity of the pipeline. it may or may not talk about the direction of flow. depending on whether your existing permit already contemplates what you're trying to do, you may be able to do it -- without any further action. if it doesn't, and what you're toing to do would commit your existing permit, you would have to go back and submit an application to the state department to amend or modify the existing permit. what isave to identify sufficient enough? there is not really enough case

studies to have any idea how this would go one way or another based on any particular case. there is really no indication as to where that line is drawn. it is very much a gray area. in ownership might invoke the need for presidential permit. we have heard from a number of entities that have said that waiting the outcome of keystone xl before they make an application. i think for all those reasons, given the origin of this process --here is an executive hi, thank you all. i am wondering what the implications are on capitol hill and also in terms of permitting process for other transporter

energy projects? not specifically natural gas, but coal, which is under a lot of debate in the pacific northwest at the moment, given the -- at the moment. do you have any comments or insights on those energy issues? >> are you talking about the export debate? yeah, i think that is -- most likely would be considered a separate matter. is not necessarily in respect to coal, but crude, crudeh exports, and i think the debate there is being handled -- it is probably a separate matter. i am not sure the keystone decision would way one way or another on that. >> this fits into the larger context of energy infrastructure. crosss not raise the border question, but does raise the larger question of the

bureaucratic hurdles that apply to just about any form of energy infrastructure. >> last panel talked about rail. up what wouldt happen if you pipeline to the border rather than beyond. laying around the intent there, i guess, but can you address rail versus pipeline and why things are different? before inthis comment other forums. we have kind of stumbled in a way into making choices about ofrgy infrastructure because the gratuity of how these are implemented in different ways. railroads are also regulated

under a different set of statutes. the track is there. railroads have their processing permit. again,lot of this oil -- when oil becomes backed up or blockaded because there is not a lot of pipeline capacity, no it has to go get permission to put the oil on a rail car. there has been some controversy about the railcar it self, as has been mentioned. but the movement on the railcar is just something that happens. so, there is a disparity, a big disparity, between how long it takes to get a pipeline project up and running, compared to how long it takes to build a rail terminal, find railcars, and start moving. we have seen this in north dakota in a big way with shale deposits in north dakota. five or six years ago, there was probably no oil moving by rail in north dakota. 700,000,re is probably

800 barrels per day moving by rail in north dakota. of the review is for the approval of the facility at the order, not me importation of the oil. if the infrastructure exists to move it, you do not have a problem under these executive orders. in terms of pipeline versus rail or other means, our committee is neutral. what we are essentially saying is the decision should not be made by putting the thumb on the scale by making it much, much -- one formhe warm of infrastructure to be built. that is what we would like to address. >> it is an issue of timing as well. i know this is a process you want to get done, but canadian critics have said, we're stretching out the timing on this, we are adding more

processes, we are taking too long. it should be a no-brainer. any comments on timing on that? could anyone guess how long a permit is going to take? it is less guesswork on the gas pipeline side, because the ferc really has done a pretty admirable job of trying to control the schedules on those and become more consistent about the time frames. they do not always hit the mark, but they are reasonably good on that. problem from the presidential permit standpoint is each time someone has gone in, it has gotten longer. i am told -- i was not around back in the 1960 failed to do this. i am told you wrote a letter to the state department saying, i want to cross the border. here's what to do. they wrote you back and said, here is your permit. that certainly does not happen today. every time a pipeline has gone

through this process, it has tended to be more difficult and time-consuming. hopefully that is not always going to be true for all pipelines. keystone seems to be a special case, but i think it would be very helpful from the pipeline industry's point of view and the oil industry's point of view in terms of how they're going to rely on those pipelines to have a more consistent timeframe. >> one area where the u.s. is fairly unique is there are these open-ended processes and one of the things we would be looking at in terms of process reforms a to put the process on schedule, a time certain where yes or no questions -- answers would be required. >> playing out the a process with gas --ferc does gas and there may be others. how does politics affect this

process? one would think the process is set out and you can do it. it is set out for public input, yes, but does the process get interfered with politically and how? >> this is as good a time as any to give you a little caveat. certainly it is fair to say that todoes, but my directive is be as impartial and nonpartisan as possible. >> ok, you are off the hook. >> each type of energy, just how the law grows for it independently, it comes about haphazardly. there is a political process and a role for each one. for whatever reason, natural gas is treated different than oil is treated. we have not gotten to the question of electric oil. politics plays and oil, but there is no concerted effort to

treat the way each thing develops. >> in terms of affecting those foresses, the ferc process gas pipelines, they do have publicperiods, there is input. you see that to a greater or lesser degree depending on the public budget. what is going on more on the domestic oil pipeline front as well as the cross-border oil front, it pipeline has become a very competitive -- combative process where landowners, environmental groups show up more now and are more assertive in their views. and in some cases the process starts to stretch out. someone mentioned that nebraska projects a six to eight-month process there. we have seen states processes becoming longer and longer is

the process becomes more politically charged. >> upstream issues -- most specifically greenhouse gas -- have been a key part of the debate. have you seen evolution in the the states are considering those issues as part of the permitting process? these think it will evolve further going forward? you think it will evolve further going forward? >> that is a hard one. you know, at the state level, you do not see as much of the debate as we have seen in keystone -- clearly it is a factor. it gets brought up. there is not so much debate. state,re in a particular nebraska, the issues are going to be very particular. are you routing it over the allow log were for? is it going to go through the

schoolyard? politics is local. it is very locally focused. tendsk the broader check to occur at the federal level and if you are the department of state, even the ferc. >> it is certainly the effort on the part of the environmental organizations to include upstream and downstream considerations vis-à-vis these infrastructure projects. of course, if you do so and these projects carry fossil fuels, that is not good news. this was not formally part of the a process. so, exactly what counts and what does not count is something that never was found out. >> do you see significant ?hanges in process you mentioned legislation that might be coming up next term. how significantly do you think

this process can be changed? without -- i don't know -- going crazy? >> i do not know about the prospects. there will be an effort. as i mentioned, we had a that-border bill essentially treated these cross-border projects very differently than if they were in trade u.s. projects. u.s. projects. i do not know what the process would be, but hopefully at some point there would be a bipartisan attempt to tackle this infrastructure challenge. looked at sixave years of keystone politics, process. anything else you want to say? i think it has been a good discussion. i have learned a lot. in thankingoin me

our great panel. our second panel and our other -- first panel. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014]

>> coming up in about 15 minutes, we will go live to a thefing on the latest from cdc on the ebola virus. we will have that for you at 3 p.m. eastern year on c-span. what we wait for that, a segment from this morning's "washington journal." the president of the university of maryland and he discussed public policy issues

and the role of the big ten conference. ourh series on university presidents. this morning, c-span is on the campus of maryland. this is about nine miles from washington dc. joining us is the president wallace loh. thank you for your time. sat scores are raising worries about college readiness. fared nool graduates better on the college admission tests than their predecessors. what are you finding on this? arc high school students -- are high school students ready for college? guest: good morning. we are glad we are neighbors and the nations capital. what is important to know about

standardized test like the sat is they are a predictor of college success, they are not the most predictor. what we have found is high types ofades and the courses taken are a much more significant predictor of college success. when we admit students, we look at a variety of factors in deciding admission, not just primarily test scores. the test scores of our students coming to the university of maryland is very high. has that happened over the years? is that the trend, that you have looked less and less it test scores? i think people in the business of admissions and educational psychologists have known that the principal predictor of success are the courses you have taken and how well you have done in high school. the sat complements that.

i don't know of any school that relies primarily or significantly on test scores. host: what about diversity? maryland is 30% african-american. the university of maryland is 15% asian and 12% african-american. do you go about trying to obtain diversity? we have a diverse student body. we have a very talented student body. our diversity is 44%. when i first came to this country, people of color were around 10%. immigration, of the demographic has changed. that is one of the great challenges for higher education, how to expand access to people

from minority groups, many of whom come from lower incomes and are less prepared for college. host: how are you going about doing that? diversity a larger criteria for admission? one of about 24 criteria that we look at. it is a holistic assessment. the way we do it is aggressively go out and recruit. we go to high schools. we go to different community groups to encourage talented young minority students to come. we have some programs for them. we have college preparatory programs. we are expanding the pipeline. we are providing precollege experiences so that when they come to college, they are better prepared. we are talking with the

president of the university of maryland. you don't have to have any ties to the university of maryland. we want to take your comments and concerns about higher education. you have an extensive that in higher education. you have a phd in psychology from the university of michigan. what has that taught you about higher education? what does it bring to the table for you? guest: i think education is the

great equalizer in a democracy. when people ask what educators do, i say that we are in the business of transforming people's lives. we are opening opportunities for them. we are making a difference on major issues of the day by our research and educational efforts. this impact, it extends beyond the current generation. educators have an impact that lasts through eternity. that is the immortality business. let's talk about the university of maryland. your nine miles from washington. university take advantage of your proximity to the agencies here? guest: washington has the second-highest number of college

students after boston. it is an incredible opportunity in terms of culture and internships for the students. research, wend partner with federal agencies and federal labs. we are surrounded by intelligence and military establishments. we do joint research. we have contracts with them. the opportunities are immense. i think the university of maryland would not be the institution it is if or not eight miles from the nations capital. grants.u have federal what can of contract you have? it is $500 million worth. they are in all sorts of areas. we are engaged in unmanned spaceflights. with the cyber security of

homeland security and intelligence agencies, we are strong in cyber security. we just got a huge grant to establish standards in new technology. we are working on climate change. we have the largest concentration of earth scientist in the world. we are very strong because of our ties to the federal government in the area of languages. verye talking about esoteric languages. major emphasis on the study of terrorism. these have issues with national security and the economy. it is very closely tied to the agencies of the federal government. just in a student is an

a, what sort of major does the university of maryland offer? these go beyond national security itself. that's what we have expertise in language, flagship language security,cyber science and technology. there is an ormiston manned in those fields. continue our national supremacy in science and technology. we are also very strong in the performing arts. we are a comprehensive university. the access to the federal government and federal agencies

in partnership with other institutions is broadly expanding the opportunities for education and research. the advisoryes board do? guest: i am sorry? i don't know what it is. -- go there are lots of ahead. i'm not firmly with that advisory board. in 2005.was created it is 20 university presidents that meet collectively in d.c.. they consult with federal agencies. i am wondering, what does the federman get out of partnering with a school like the university of maryland? what is the attraction for the federal government?

it is a partnership. i now remember this fbi group. it deals with homeland security. there were a number of presidents of universities on that panel. the government gets joint research. they get graduates who can move your into the workforce. do not reach project together. the federal government needs partners just like we need partners with the federal government. we combine our resources. if you take the study of

terrorism, we have 25 other universities and abroad who are working together to study issues dealing with terrorism. the same thing is true with our advanced that he of languages, which is funded by intelligence agencies. thelatest grant from go with thean private sector and other institutions. we set up standards and protocols for cyber security. that isa grant renewable every five years for up to 25 years. the federal government needs universities and they need to bring in the private sector as well. thesees a team to address large issues. aboutwe are talking

higher education with the president of the university of maryland. we have a number of phone lines open. we will begin with adam in north carolina. he is a student. caller: i want to ask two questions. what things are being put in place for students that are nontraditional students. i have to work full-time. i have a family. maintain full-time student status. graduate schools and medical schools are looking for programs that people are involved in within the school. i don't have the time. i am matched up against these other students that have all these other extracurricular activities.

my account has been hacked in the past. i am wondering what schools and universities are doing. or is the financial aid material. they are stealing ied's. i.d.s. nontraditional students, i think that people will have several career is over their lifetime. learning has become lifetime learning. indeed the university of maryland along with other schools are dealing with

lifelong learning, crafting special programs for them. one specific thing worth mentioning is the prevalence of online education and the uses of state education together with online education. what it was 10 years ago. this could be a game changer in higher education. issue, howress the to educate more students of all ages and educate them better and educate them more inexpensively. that is the safety $4000 question. combining online education with personalized education and adaptive software and personalizing education to fit an individual's needs, that is partly the future of higher education. especially for millennial's who are always on their internet things.

partnk that is an interval of addressing nontraditional students. was a very major issue facing the country, cyber security. it is a national security issue. have 50,000 students. the solution is you have to identify your sensitive information. is out offy where it the thousands and thousands of computers in the network. then you isolated by building defenses around it. then you encrypted and you also want to detect penetration of the boundaries of your network. costly, but this is not just about technical fixes, it is about changing the culture of how we approach cyber

security. it has to be top down. you can't have different departments having their own e-mail systems. you can have individual people having their own websites. they have to be centrally issues offor security. let's go to matthew, a student. caller: thank you for taking my call. how do you reconcile the phenomenon of six-figure salaries for colleges been us traitors while college professors work as part-time , they have to cobble together classes to get some kind of minimum wage level salary while they teach the

students who are graduating with an average of $30,000 of student debt? how does that shakeout for you economically and morally? i think you are raising several important questions. let me address the issue of student debt. this is around 30,000 nationally. it is rising and becoming an issue of national because state funding has gone down accordingly. that what we are seeing is a reflection of political and economic changes. we are looking at smaller government and lower taxes and less funding available for

higher education. the expectation is students have to pay a larger share. this is a shift in philosophy to education. public education and the public good that serves all of society, or is it something that only serves those who benefit from it? the state of maryland is fortunate that our tuition is relatively low. approximately $9,400, about $4000 less than the median. our state appropriations are relatively high. 40% is paid by the student and 60% is paid by the state.

in other parts of the country, the proportion is reversed. that is a fundamental issue and it reflects political and economic and philosophical trends. the numbers of adjunct faculty, we have faculty andy 4000 1500 are tenured. the rest are full-time research faculty in visiting faculty and lectures. abouthave some that teach $4000 a course. they tend to be people who have full-time jobs. they are lawyers who teach a particular law course. higher education does have the issue of individuals who do not have full-time employment. this is part of the larger issue. over the past 30 years, the has declineditions

as a result of the decline in state funding for higher education. trends part of the larger . this is increasing income inequality. this is job stagnation. these are larger issues that the nation must address. host: we have about 20 minutes left. are taking your questions about higher education in this country. this is from another viewer who says there are 20 division i teams

at the university of maryland. question? take that we have 20 teams treat we used to have 27 and it was a painful process to cut seven teams. we had to reduce the number because we were unable to support it. what makes us different is athletics is a self-supporting enterprise. there is no state funding for athletics. i think what is important to keep in mind is athletics in this country is very different than others around the world. there are professional club sports and people can go into clubs. here it is part and parcel of

the educational system. it is a source of enormous school spirit and pride. donorsare very generous are energized by our athletic teams. it is the front porch of the university. it is not the most important part, but for many people it's the most visible part. in terms of becomes the funding of athletics, it is important to have two things in mind. funds to not go to support athletics. on revenue that the conferences bring in. the other thing is institutional control. athletics should be in the service of the educational mission of the institution.

us, a student athlete and they are students first, success on the field and in the classroom and in life. those are the values that guide our athletic program. host: we have a few lines open. yourfree to call in with questions and comments. we want to hear from maryland residents. let's go to north carolina. jeff is on the air. caller: i just had a question. i apologize for calling in on the wrong number. thatestion is, do you find is so strict and being ethnically diverse and not

everybody is cut out for college and we are trying to provide a platform but we are reducing the standards to get into these institutions? we are reducing the standards for graduating? what the great thanks -- strengths is there many sectors. are the other big ten universities that are highly ranked. they are public flagships. they are among the strongest academic institutions. there are committee colleges. there are liberal arts colleges. there is a whole array of educational opportunities. what is important to remember is that we live in a knowledge-based economy. could yeton ago, you a decent middle-class job and have a middle-class life without going to college. that is no longer possible.

only a generation ago, we lead the world and the proportion of college graduates. we are now 14th or 15th. in terms of science and engineering and math, we are ranked 20th. are losing our supremacy in education and in science and technology. if we are going to win the future, if we are going to be the most vibrant economy in the we have to x we are going live now to the centers for disease control and prevention in atlanta. an update on the first ebola case diagnosed in the u.s. speaking now, tom friedman. the director of the cdc. this started a couple of moments

ago. >> we recognize that whatever we do until the disease is controlled in africa, we cannot get the risk to zero here. we may be able to reduce it and we will look at every opportunity to do so. we also don't want to do anything that will backfire. in medicine, one of our cardinal rules is, above all, do no harm. if we do something that impedes our ability to stop the outbreak in west africa, it could spread further there. we could have more countries like liberia. and the challenge would be much greater and then go on for a much longer time. we know how to stop ebola. that is what is happening in dallas today. is what is beginning to occur in parts of west africa. there.ns of progress are but it is going to be a long, hard fight. and we should always keep in mind that the enemy here is a virus.

and we, together, can cut -- can stop that virus. i would now like to turn it over to the commissioner for the texas department of state health services. >> thank you, dr. frieden, and good afternoon to everyone. as he noted, we learned when we did go today -- one week ago today that a patient tested positive for ebola in dallas. even as we deal with the national and international issues related to ebola, we are dealing with this in dallas. time, at a very sensitive when a contact could develop symptoms. we are monitoring with extreme vigilance. a contactntact -- if develops symptoms, we will tell you. you also immediately isolate that individual, test that individual, and increased monitoring as we roll out and confirm ebola. the contact investigation is going exactly as it should. it is in constant motion.

hosting contacted members daily. they have not changed since sunday. always a possibility as we pursue every possible contact. the bottom line is anyone who needs to be monitored will be. i'm also mindful that the rest of texas and the fact that this is case -- the rest of texas affected by this one case in our hospitals. hospitals are on high alert right now, because they don't want to miss anyone who present with a travel history and symptoms of ebola. if we get requests for testing, we will value it that in consultation with the centers for disease control. and we are able to do that type in -- that testing safely and timely. to recall that the people we are monitoring are real people. i cannot think of anything more unnerving for them right now than this as they wait. but we can and will contain the spread of this disease and protect the public by following

our corporate look health -- core public health measures. that is what is going on right now in dallas as we fight against ebola. again, thank you dr. frieden, and thank you everyone for being a part of this conference today. >> thank you. we will not take questions, starting in the room. wait for the microphone. now take questions, starting in this room. wait for the microphone. does the effort that have been started in the various countries explain the differences in cases in the district that you are mentioning? what explains the reduction in that area that had been a very hot area that now is not? >> there have been differences in the areas. urban areas, so it has an effect on the spread of the disease. urban areas are controlled

activities. for example, in the capital of guinea, they have done such a thatjob of contact tracing until recently, and we will see if that holds, that virtually every one of the cases that has arisen has been able to be monitored. that allows them to stop transmission. also, we have seen changes in caregiving and burial practices. as people learn about ebola, they learn the risks and they change their behaviors. usaid, the agency for international development, has contracted for burial teams throughout liberia. they have been ramping up to improve the proportion of burials that are done safely and respond to calls for assistance with varying of bodies. we have also improved infection control in health-care settings, although there is still a long way to go there. we do not know what the future will hold. there is no way to know in some ways what accounts for the

progress and whether it will hold, but we are seeing some communities where we see progress. would divide the communities in west africa into three types. there are communities that have very few or no cases of ebola. there, our focus is preparedness. such as what we have done in uganda. an emergencyed operations center. we empower the county. we identify a way of testing for the virus. we train in contact tracing. we improve caregiving and funeral practices, so we can break the train of transmission. and we try to keep those areas with lower events of ebola and having -- and prevent them from having widespread outbreaks. also, there are countries that do not have any ebola cases. and there, you want to make sure there is intensive preparation for the single possible case, that you prevent it from spreading widely. and finally there are those that

have lots of cases. and there, we break the true train of transmission. we get to patients probably, and if they die, we make sure that no one is effective in the process of burying them. and we've learned a lot about how to work with committees most sensitively in that process, for example, providing divinities with the opportunity to observe -- providing communities with the opportunity to observe as they are burying their dead. and we respect traditions, in terms of certain faiths want only people of certain faiths to touch the body of someone who has died. beening the lesson has really important, and working with health-care workers so that they keep in mind the incredible importance of rigorous infection control. yes? >> mentor l from cnbc. we have been hearing a lot about extremity drugs on patients here in the u.s. can you give me guidance about

how you're thinking about that and whether there is any centralize decision-making happening here in the u.s.? >> in terms of extremity will medicines for patients with ebola, there is a lot of interest. right now, the two that we are aking at closely ,z-mapp, common nation of three different antibodies. it is promising. as far as we understand, there is none left in the world, and it takes time to make more. a second drug is also promising in animal models, although there may be charges in using it in individual patients. and there are limited quantities of that as well. in texas isent getting a third drug, which shows some promise in a test tube model of ebola. really, it's up to the doctors, the patient, the companies -- nih's very involved in drug development.

parts of the u.s. government have been very supportive of that within hhs and the department of defense. it is an individualized decision, but i would step back a bit and say that what we have learned about ebola is how important it is to get the patient's basic care right. so that we are treating their fluid and electrolyte balance well. that is critically important to survival. let's take the next question in the room. and then we will go to the phone. >> the texas patient did receive an example drug. has he had any reaction to that? and what other treatments has he received other than supported kerry echo >> -- other than supportive care? >> the hospital released a statement that he is intubated and he is on dialysis to support his kidney functions. experimentaleiving treatment. he remains in critical condition.

>> there are members of congress urging the cdc to create new guidelines for screening for ebola at international airports. is this something you're working on? is this something you believe is needed, or is enough being done? >> we are working intensively on the screening process, as the president said, both in places of origin and on arrival to the u.s. and we are looking at at entire process to see what maybe done. i want to provide you with information about what is being done now in africa and here in the u.s. in west africa in each of these west -- in each of these three countries, cdc has had teams on the ground for several months training people within each a questionnaire and take the temperature of every person getting on a plane to leave the country. and that is at the request of the governments of these countries. they absolutely understand that keeping travel going is vital to

their ability to stop the epidemic, and to their ability to continue functioning as societies. they are willing to go through any procedures to make sure it is safe. all three of the president directly asked me, tell us what more we can do for screening people so we can make sure that the airlines keep flying? because about half of the airlines have canceled and stopped flights since the out rate -- outbreak started. over the past two months, the staff we trained who are using thermometers that are calibrated and approved by the fda for use and do not require touch and can be used from a few inches away, we have overseen the screening of about 36,000 people who have been boarding planes. those, three quarters of those, do not come to the u.s. only a small proportion come to the u.s. of those, about 77 had either fever, indicates the case of 74,

or symptoms that made us take them off the line in the case of the other three. that is roughly one in about 100 travelers. as far as we know, none of those 77 people had ebola. many of them had malaria. that is a disease that is spread by mosquitoes. it cannot be spread from one person to another. it is extremely common in west africa and a major source of disease there. if you are finding fever in people from west africa, the most common single cause of that is going to be malaria. but we will absolutely look at every step that could tighten that process. screening at airports, of course, would not have found fever in the patient in dallas, because he did not have fever for four or five days after he arrived. but we will look at all the options. we are not today providing the steps that we plan to take, but i can assure you that we will be taking additional steps and making those public in the coming days once we can work out the details.

let's go to the phone for a couple of questions. we will come back to the room if we have time. >> thank you. we will begin the question and answer question -- session. if you would like to ask a question, please press star one on your phone. the first question comes from cnn. you may ask your question. >> thank you for taking my question. i'm sure you're aware of the case in spain where a nurse has become infected. don'trious -- i know we know all of the details of this is more for dr. lakey and those involved in the treatment. have there been any cause about the road -- the protocols in the u.s. and elsewhere? could you detail the precautions that are taken and recommended? >> dr. lakey, why don't you start and i will add a couple of comments at the end. >> thank you.

article and wet are concerned about what is going on in spain right now. that articlesaw and we are concerned about what is going on in spain right now. look at the protocols they are doing right now at presbyterian hospital, and they take this very seriously. it's a vacant ward makes up for this individual where they are caring for him. they have policy and procedures that are mapped out. i would also say, as i went into the ward, i signed in. they have security there. where youthe area have a down, gloves, double gloves, put on the appropriate versatile protective equipment. and then you can see the individual and take care of the individual. and they have protocols when they are done to protect that

individual, making sure that they take the equipment off appropriately and that they can shower before they come out of the ward. they take this really seriously. they done -- they have done so since the beginning. they are following meticulous protection and control practices. having said that, again, the unfortunate news going on in spain, it can't help but make -- increase some of the anxiety going on right now. but again, i want to say that they are doing their work very safely right now. and we continue to watch that. dr. frieden? >> thank you. what i would emphasize is that inrything we are seeing africa and elsewhere suggest that the way ebola is spreading has not changed. where we have seen health care worker infections, we have no additional information beyond what is in the media reports about what is happening in

spain. there have also been recent infections in west africa that are very concerning. have seen problems, they have come in two different contexts. situationis the new and the health care team has not dealt with ebola before. and two, if the team is overburdened. if they are given with so many patients or have such a staff shortage that it's possible that even the best and most meticulous people may cut corners. that is why we have emphasized to global partners who are working in west africa that most, four weeks or at six weeks is the maximum deployment time. then you need to rotate out and have another set of individuals there. i know of at least one infection that occurred in individual who is known to be very meticulous. we don't know how the infection occurred, but we do know that it happened when he extended his stay past that six week time frame. and in the next two weeks that the individual wanted to provide

care, the infection occurred. ensuring that we have meticulous, careful, well drilled situation is very important. i have said and i repeat that we know how to stop ebola from spreading in hospitals. but that does not mean it is easy. meticulousu need attention to detail. you need a team working together . you need to make sure that every aspect of the protocol is rigorously and meticulously followed. in some of the ebola units in africa, one of the keys to success is having someone in ,harge of the unit who is very very experienced and who is roving at all times, identifying anything that might possibly be a risk. there are many things that have to be checked carefully, from the concentration of bleach that is used, to the procedures for putting on and taking off protective equipment, to what actually happens in the ebola treatment area. next question on the phone. >> the next question comes from

evan brown, fox's radio. >> dr. lakey and dr. frieden, thank you for doing this. there was an article in the newspaper today where they had interviewed some epidemiologists who worked on previous outbreaks of ebola. and they say that they cannot thewith certainty that virus would not mutate to other forms, including an airborne form, which would certainly change the dynamic of how it spreads. like you to take a moment to react to that, or at least give us your thoughts or opinions, or some technical explanation that the rest of us can another -- can understand. and i have a follow-up regarding that. >> ebola spread by direct contact with someone who is sick , or with the body fluids of someone who is sick or has died from it. do not see airborne transmission in the outbreak in africa. we don't see it elsewhere in what we have seen so far. the ebola virus itself has had a

great deal of genetic stability, so between the beginning of this outbreak and more recent isolates, the isolate our about a 9.9% similar. even if -- the isolates are about 99.9% similar. even the recent discoveries, the changes in the virus are less than 5%. furthermore, most viruses don't change how they spread. to do that would require a very large genetic change. if we look at evil as a class of virus, the sub species is ebola desire -- zaire. there are about 80 different sub species and they differ among them, but all of the also spread bydirect contact, not airborne route. that is not to say that it is impossible that he could change or be selected out for a broad trends mission. that would absolutely be the worst-case scenario.

not sowould know that much from tracking genetic changes, but by looking at what is happening in africa. that is why we have teams of epidemiologists from cdc on the ground tracking that. one of the things we are doing at this point, i discussed earlier the heterogeneity, the differences between countries. we are now searching the cdc response to go out into the counties's most affected, the areas most affected, and provide intensive support there for the care of patients, for the tracking of the outbreak, and to see what has happened. everything we have seen until now does not suggest a change in how ebola spreads. >> if i may follow up. >> please. >> transmission is the ultimate bogeyman for a lot of people. especially here in the united states. a lot of the cases we've seen in the u.s. with regard to people being brought in, or with this dallas patient, they have been

able to access a major urban center hospital. for those who live in suburbs, and even further out where they only have access immediately to smaller, acute care type hospitals, what is the protocol for them? are they equipped to handle this? not, how does someone who shows up at a small hospital who could potentially be in ebola case, what is the protocol for getting them to a more adept facility? the first point is to suspect ebola and diagnose it promptly. that is quickly important. in terms of the physical arrangements for infection control, you don't need a fancy facility for that. you need a private room with a private bathroom. protocols to be followed, we would work with the state and local health departments to support any hospital to do that. it would not be easy, but can be done and can be done safely. next question on the phone.

operator? fromr next question comes bart jensen, usa today. >> hello, thanks for taking the call. senator schumer, among others, has called for greater screening of inbound travelers. he said after meeting with you that he suspects you are likely to follow his recommendations. i wonder, for lack of direct flights of these western african countries to the u.s., can you say how you choose the airport and the passengers? we are looking intensely at this and anticipate announcing new measures much coming days. withwe can do working customs and border protection in the department of homeland security is identify even people who have arrived by indirect flights and identify the airports to which they have arrived. >> thank you. >> nest -- next question on the

phone. >> thank you for taking my call. this question is for the texas commission of health service. to help onr response the ground? have there been any other cases in texas at this time? >> there have been no other cases in texas. our hospitals are on high alert. a lot of hombre stations have taken place with emergency managers across the state. managersad emergency on the phone talking about the current situation and we have had all with all hospitals in the state of texas. over 1000 lines opened talking about what is going on and making sure we are prepared. case currently hospitalized, that is presbyterian. we have individuals that are being closely monitored and the contact tracing is continue to go forward. they are being dairy visual --

very vigilant in that making sure our numbers are solid and that we are meticulous in making sure every individual identified has been monitored. we have one case that has been identified. >> if i may, is there any other contact you are monitoring that have tested positive or are you still waiting on those results at this time? >> there is no other testing of any individual in texas right now. it would not be surprising if we have another patient from somewhere in africa or west africa that is found dead. we have identified malaria on individuals but there is no additional testing taking place in texas at this point. we are capable of doing that and can do it very quickly, now that we have that capability in our laboratory, but there is no other testing to my knowledge

and i have checked with my folks very carefully and i know there's no testing in texas right now. -- 10t to reiterate contacts with definite contacts, 38 with possible contacts, none have fever, none have symptoms at all have an monitored in texas. leahy hasdr. described working with health departments and hospitals throughout texas are the steps we are taking nationally. called with a health officers from all 50 states and i will be asking her lady to share the key lessons experience on that call. we are always looking to see what more we can do to make sure we are consistently improving in our ability to respond. clarify 36,000 is over what time frame? >> roughly 36,000 over two months will stop we will take

two more questions from the phone and that will be at the stop >> our next question comes from the associated press will stop >> thank you very much. the madrid officials say they forseeking a court order the dog of the nursing assistant who has tested positive. can dogs transmit ebola two people and are there any dogs or any other animals involved in the immediate contacts you are monitoring? is one article in medical literature that discusses the presence of antibodies to ebola in dogs. whether that was an accurate test and whether that was relevant, we don't know. clearly, we want to look at all possibilities. we have not identified this as a means of transmission. we do know in rural areas of africa that ebola, that is how

it is spread -- probably from bats to animals living in the forest and then beat the hunting those animals. when they hunt the animals and prepare them for serving, they may become infected from the blood. we do not think that is a means of transmission and i cannot comment on the specifics of spain. i will ask dr. leahy to comment on texas. >> thank you. we are not monitoring any animals at this time. i have no knowledge of any animals being in the house or exposed. >> last question on the phone. >> our last question comes from the "wall street journal." >> i just wanted to go back to travel screening possibilities for a second. two of the ideas that have been brought up as likely or reasonable are similar screening methods used in the affected

countries like temperature checks and questionnaires for passengers arriving from those entries. comment on what you think of the possibility of adding those in place in the u.s.? i wanted to ask weekly if cdc has any involvement in the investigation of the case of the nurse in spain? >> in terms of the additional travel screening procedure, those are ones we are looking at very carefully. in terms of spain, i'm not aware we have been consulted but we would be happy to do so. would you like to make any last comments? >> i again want to thank the cdc for their support here in the state of texas. we are working carefully with the city, county, other state agencies and the federal government to make sure we have

one team as we do everything we can to ensure other texans are not exposed to this disease. obviously, this is a critical week. a lot of monitoring has to take lace. my message to health care providers in texas and across the nation is you cannot diagnose this disease unless you think of this disease. you are not going to think about it unless you do the travel history. make sure everyone knows that information. we will continue to respond and watch this very closely and we will continue to be transparent with the information that we have to make sure of any individual develops symptoms that we tell you and we will care for those individuals compassionately, isolating them, testing them and monitoring them as we need to protect the public's health in the state of texas. thank you. >> thank you and your team

therefore superb work in the follow-up, communications and outreach will stop i know this is a challenging time and we feel fortunate to be working with you. thebottom line here is fight against ebola in africa is going to be a long, hard fight. the enemy is a virus, a difficult virus to stop, that we know how to stop it will stop tried and true what health measures, isolation of patients, infection control and safe burial practices make the difference. and we are seeing some signs of progress will stop the excellent response in dallas, the ongoing control in the drc. progress in parts of west africa. but it is going to be a long hard fight but together, we can contain and control ebola. thank you very much. >> our campaign 2014 coverage

will continue tonight with coverage of a number debate -- number of debates, the getting with the west virginia senate date. they are vying for the seat held by jay rockefeller who is retiring. that debate gets underway at 7:00 eastern. here is a look at some of the recent campaign ads. >> we are losing our choice of doctors from a higher deductible and higher premium, that inhibits our choice and those are things west virginians dear. >> shelley moore caps on ports having portable from job to job. >> is going to be more expensive for small businesses and this administration has put a damper on our way of life and our love of freedom. >> i approve this message. >> our daughter had open heart

surgery to save her life. well friends, family, and folks across west virginia prayed with called insurance company it a pre-existing condition. i know was not done right and there's a lot that can be done different, but i will not go back to the days of when health insurance company said they would not cover our children. >> doctors say we are seeing politics at its worst. my opponent is tacking -- is attacking my personal integrity with ads that are blatantly false. i'm disappointed but not surprised because she has sown -- she has shown she will do anything. misleading voters just to get elected is not a west virginia value and i'm willing to fight for my family as i have for all west virginia families. >> i'm natalie tennant and i approve this message. >> what to we really know about

congresswoman shelley cap toe? she helps anchors get rich and in return, they have given her nearly $2 million. but there is more. while west virginians were losing their jobs and savings to wall street, she gave her husband, and wall street banker, insider tips and they made more than $100,000. she keeps getting richer and west virginians pay the price. 7:00, the debate between our quarter and ed gillespie, the former head of the republican national committee. also counselor to president george w. bush will stop it is his first time running for elected office. that debate will be on c-span two. is a look at some of the ads running in that space. enron -- the largest corporate fraud in american history. ed gillespie was their lobbyists. firm was given $700,000 to

lock the utility markets and then it got even worse. >> the former leaders of enron had to prison. >> ed gillespie, the million-dollar lobby to put enron ahead of you. put a priceing to on carbon. >> mark warner and obama want to tax coal, which would kill thousands of good paying virginia jobs. >> the obama-warner anti-coal agenda will devastate the local economy and kill dozens of good paying virginia jobs. i will fight any coal tax. my plan will lower the cost of energy and create good paying jobs. i'm ed gillespie and i approve this message. >> ed gillespie, enron lobbyists and partisan is attacking mark warner with false ads being called completely made up.

mark warner is helping to fix health care and find a bipartisan solution to cut the national debt. it's why republicans, including a former governor, u.s. senator him and -- have endorsed him. >> i mark warner, and i approve this message. >> i'm ed gillespie, i approve this message. i worked my way through college and my parents grocery store and senate parking lot attendant. there is opportunity and dignity and work, but today am a too many virginians are squeezed by mark warner and president obama's policies that raise taxes to increase prices, and kill jobs. mark warner votes with the president 97% of the time. that is not bipartisan. time for a new direction. >> the north carolina senate debate takes place tonight between tom tillis and kay hagan. that debate will take place early this evening and we will show it to you at 9:00 eastern.

republicans have a 60% chance of taking over the senate according to pollster charlie cook. last her stay, the national journal posted him for an election preview. the people's republic of montgomery county. thank you all for coming out. great crowd and i'm looking forward to this. chance tog for a greenberg will stop its two things i'm looking forward to because it's too of the brightest and most talented people in town. -- they've been

known for close to 70 years. sogo back 30 odd years and these are folks i have enjoyed being with and love watching their work. there are two great prose and two great people. i'm looking forward to that will shall ofme do a very where i am and then i want to to talk and stand up about what they are seeing out there. back to the early part of last year, there were two competing scenarios, to theories of what the 2014 midterm elections could be about. one theory was some of the challenges and problems facing the republican party in 2012 which flow into 2014. the other was this would be a classic mid-term referendum on the incumbent president and all

that entails. two competing directions that could have gone either way. challenges the facing the republican party, some of them with key voting groups and some of them with some of the things they were challenge tohey the minority voters -- we know governor romney got 59% of the white vote and nobody's ever gotten 59% of the white vote and lost the election before. quite simply what is happening is the country is changing so much that it is getting hard and devote or congress was almost identical. if you are losing the african-american vote and the asian-american vote, they don't enough white voters -- how well can you do in order to win if given the changing demographics to the country?

the vote for congress was virtually identical. you look at that and say it's a big demographic challenge the republican party is going to have to face. young voters, losing eight team to 29-year-olds, that's a challenge will stop even when your best group is winning by 12 points, this is a trend that has to be ominous for republicans down the way. so it turned 60 last year, look at voters under 45, under 40, they are the future and i look in the mirror and look at those who are roughly our age, we are like the three dead.

that has to be an ominous trend. there were some very specific challenges that were very problematic for republicans in 2012 and could have been in 2014. there was one other things that plagued republicans and that was simply a pattern they develop in those two elections of nominating exotic and potentially problematic people for the u.s. senate who had the defeatability to seize from the jaws of victory. some interesting people. were republicans going to nominate against some of these people that would have the chance to seize defeat from the jaws of victory?

to happen?ing these are real challenges facing the republican party and one they had to worry about going into 2012. on the other hand, what are midterm elections about? it's a referendum on the incumbent president and they are not always that way. clinton's election turned out to be a backlash against impeachment. it's sort of the reverberation from 9/11 occurring. as my friend stu rothenberg likes to point out, the party of the white house has lost elections in all elections since the civil war. i'm not going to go through any poll numbers because we've got two of the best pollsters in the business coming up, but to me,

my view is what we are seeing is the challenges that face the republican party and kept him from picking up the three seats they needed at the time to get a majority in the senate and two when the presidential race, the challenges were real and really hurt and they may be real and really hurt and 2016. but in the context of this election, they seem somewhat smaller. they don't seem to be the deal breakers that they were and 2012. if you went back to a year and half ago, what's the worst-case scenario you could have. that could be a president with really low approval numbers in the low to mid 40's with disapproval and the low to mid 50's. lousy approval ratings on the economy, handling foreign policy, think of the wall street

journal poll -- neil's from is the republican half of that whole but it was 40 approved, 54 disapproved, so your -14 overall. the real kicker was ensuring a strong national defense -- 32 approved, 62 disapproved. that is earth shattering. you look at that and say well -- i'm going to use a technical political science term -- it's a hummer environment for democrats. in terms of what happens -- everyone knows we've got a room full of prose year and everyone knows not much is going to happen in the house. democratic losses could be as

few as two or three and could he has many as nine, 10, 12 if republicans it 13. that's just a bit above the range of the likely out comes. 300 words or less, the way i look at it, it's like a perfect storm of factors coming together. it is exposure, just the raw numbers. that's the first factor and the least important. the bigger one is the map. it's awful for democrats. when you have seven seat up in states romney carried and only one republican seat up in a republican state and that's susan collins of maine -- she could lose that if she tried. six of the seven seats were won by 14 points or more.

you show me a state where romney won by 14 points and i will show you a 2014 i would not want to be a democrat running for front -- running for federal office. it just is what it is. midterm election turnouts tend to be better for republicans. the presidential year, the turnout is big, rod and it looks like the country. midterm elections, the turnout is 70% of a presidential turnout. it maller, more conservative, more republican. unless you have a situation like 2006 where you have an popular war in iraq and hurricane katrina, unless you have something like that, you have a turnout dynamic that will favor republicans. you look at those and say those are big atmospheric conditions.

when i do the math real quick -- maybe i should stall time just a little bit. when i do the math, i'm putting it at a 60% chance of republicans getting a majority. i've been there for three or four months. i was higher than most people and if you look at the models, the lower percentage than most computer models out there if you follow those things -- i would put it at 60% of the there are three seats that will clearly go republican -- 110, south dakota, west virginia. theoretically, republicans are halfway.

then you get to the three other democratic seats where romney carried by 14 points. mark begich in alaska, mary landrieu in louisiana. these are really, really challenging, difficult and at least a little in each one, uphill raises in each one. could one of them survive? sure. the thing about it and if him and it is a huge if. if republicans don't lose one of their own seats, like kansas, if they don't lose one of their own seats, all republicans have to do, west virginia, louisiana, arkansas, game, set, match. if one of these three survive,

any one of them survives him and that means republicans have to pick up at least one purple swing state or light lose state. or, conversely, if any public vulnerable seats lose and mitch mcconnell was in a dead even race for a long time and now he has picked up a little bit over allison grimes, he is not safe. you can see a little daylight between them and it looks to be stable. from my vantage point, it looks to be stable. democrat michelle dunn was ahead for a good while and now you've seen david perdue pull-up and you can see daylight. seems reasonably stable. i think you would have to give republicans the edge there. kansas is the one that i've

almost stopped speculating about because it's like a race from oz. it is so dam weird. you look at the experience, i've been doing this for 30 years and you say i'm based on past experience where we'd seen things like this, what has happened in the past? nothing has happened like this -- it's a unique thing -- the democrat has dropped out -- the incumbent is well-liked, but has been mailing it in for the last couple of years. it won the primary and then went home to take a nap and home to alexandria and urging you. you just say this disaster could have been avoided. this is actually neil's home state.

there's only two things we are sure about. there's going to be an election on november 4 and pat roberts wins, he will sit with republicans. that is the for what we know. everything else -- if he wins, does he decide to sit with democrats and the down, you look and say this guy looks, sounds, walks and talks like a democrat -- i think that's where his heart is. but on the other end, he's said things that says he would sing just he would do what is in the best interest of the state will stop is going to sit with them or if he is the tiebreaker, i think his heart is more democrat, but he's a relatively young guy and might want to run for reelection. sitting with republicans might be a better idea. all of this against the backdrop

of a civil war taking place within the republican party -- this causing sam brownback to be five points behind in a state that is genetically republican. it's one of the weirder things i have ever seen. but for the sake of math, let's just say roberts loses. if begich or landrieu survive, they need a purple or light blue state. if each of those things happen, democrats need to pick up to. there are five of them we are looking at where there are possibilities in this purple swing or light live and to i think are absolutely closest -- mark udall and colorado and bruce braley in iowa will stop these races are even, but if one side or the other has momentum

right now, just a little bit of momentum, who would you say? i would have to say republicans in both of those cases. it's not a prediction, they look north carolina with kay hagan -- to use a phrase i've used before, she's got small but seemingly small stable lead over tom tillis, a state senate that when a bridge too far. it has hurt the guy. it might really cost him the election. michigan, very close. it would appear gary peters, the democrat, has a very small but