believes it is prudent for those individuals to be in contact with the cdc. i believe they have been in touch with the vast majority if not all the passengers and will be working with them to ensure they understand accurately the risks they face and they are getting that kind of support they need in terms of answering questions. >> i understand, but fear is a ajor factor. when health care workers themselves are not overly careful, in effect you have a situation now where this health-care worker on the cruise ship cannot even get back to this country because the other country will not let the ship go to port, isn't it time for somebody in the administration to stand up and say publicly to health care workers, stay put, do not travel around, do not frighten the american ublic?

>> we are talking about health care workers here that particularly in the situation in dallas who were willing to step up to the plate and assume some risk to themselves in order to care for a victim of this terrible disease. that is a decision that demonstrates a lot of character and is consistent with the kind of spirit that makes the citizens of this country so roud of. i think today is a day for us to be reminded, particularly with the emergence of this video, the first health-care worker, who was transported to nih read this is a woman who assumed significantly personal risk, more risk than she thought, not because she thought it would get her fame, because she thought it would give her a raise, she did this because it was her job and she is passionate about her job in caring for someone who is sick, someone who she did not

even know. that is worthy of praise and acclaim and attention. at the same time, the cdc has a responsibility to make sure they are communicating clearly with these health care workers that face an elevated risk, and that is what the cdc has done, particularly in light of at least two of their coworkers testing positive for the ebola virus. >> a couple questions back on the ebola coordinator. can you explain what the long-term plans will be with the military, because is that something he will be oordinating? >> the function he will perform includes both activities taking place here in the united states to detect, isolate, and treat ebola patients in a way that protects the public and health care workers. it also includes coordinating activities of a variety of

federal agencies overseas. there is an effort underway by cdc, usaid, and the department of defense to try to stop this outbreak at the source in west africa. our experts tell us the only way we can completely eliminate risk from the ebola virus is to stop the outbreak at it source. that is why you see officials on the ground since the outbreak ccurred. it is why you see the president giving resources to respond in that effort, and mr. klain will have the responsibility to make sure those efforts are integrated into the overall pproach we are taking. >> you have talked about the focus on implementation. the president created a deputy chief of staff for foreign

policy implementation a few months back. part of it was trying to do with emerging issues. can you talk about why there was a need to do this or what it might say about the limited staffing you have at the white house? >> you are referring to my colleague who is the deputy chief of staff for implementation. she does some work, and she is somebody who has demonstrated on a variety of occasions the kind of tremendous capability the president expects from members of his senior staff and from a range of national security issues to the implementation of health care reform, she has demonstrated an ability to handle a lot of different highly ensitive topics and complete them exceedingly well. again, she has important responsibilities, and this coordination function were

somebody who can dedicate 100% of their time. in short, what i am saying we are confident that mr. klain is somebody who has the credentials that will allow him to succeed, because he will be able to dedicate 100% of his time to focusing on this particular response. >> right now this is an open ended commitment with no timeframe? >> i believe the expectation is this is not a permanent commitment, that we are looking at something on the order of five or six months. we can get you greater clarity on that as he assumes this role. >> i am a little unclear on exactly what he will do. will he make decisions? will he explore the policy things? will he be leading up the explanation of whether personal travel bans or changes to policy changes -- will he be doing that

or will he be doing conference calls and stuff? >> i think you can assume his role will be an important high-level implementation role, and it will be his responsibility to make sure all the government agencies who are esponsible for aspects of this response, that their efforts are carefully integrated. he will be playing a role in making sure that decisions get made, that allow decisions we are talking about here have different equities. to use the example of a school, that is a situation where you have hhs, cdc, the department of education, all with a point of view and all with a legitimate perspective on a policy decision that should be made. it will be his responsibility not to make that decision, overruling these other agencies,

but rather to convene the kind of conversations necessary to make these decisions that reflect the government's equities and make sure those decisions happen promptly. mr. klain -- this is a special area of his expertise. he has spent a lot of time in government positions and previous administrations insuring that these kinds of decisions get made properly. he has spent a lot of time mplementing the recovery act with tremendous results for our country, but in a way that was consistent with the commitment to transparency. there was somebody who was responsible for monitoring that program to assess the level of fraud. there is an extraordinarily low level of fraud associated with the recovery act. that is a testament to the anagement skills of the vice president and mr. klain. all that leads me to the conclusion of somebody with this

set of management experience and somebody who has the kind of solid working relationships with members of congress, of the administration, with state and local officials, can drive a process that will drive decisions in making sure we are putting in place the kind of healthy response the american people can expect. >> will he be talking to the president on a semi regular basis updating him? > i'm sure he will be in touch with the president as often as ms. monaco and the national security advisor determines is necessary. yes? >> the president, for the last several weeks, has been making a lot of questions about the international response. he said the international community has not done enough. for the last four or five weeks, he has been making that same comment. what exactly what does he want from the international community? what has he been able to get so

far? and why does he seem to have trouble getting everyone on board? >> let me say a couple things. the president has said that in private. you recall he conducted a phone call with the prime minister of japan a couple of days ago. he convened a meeting of european leaders by way of a secure conference to talk about the international response to this issue. yesterday the president talked to the prime minister of sweden about this. i did know as i was reading the clips that hours after hanging up with the president of the united states government of sweden committed another $10 million or $12 million to this effort. that is indicative of one small example of the president getting results. the expectation the president has is the response from individual countries across the world should reflect the severity of the situation in west africa. we need a substantial commitment

of resources and ask for this from countries around the world to make sure we are confronting the worst ebola outbreak ever. you have seen a significant commitment of american resources. the department of defense is using their logistical expertise in a way that will enhance the response. i think that will inspire the confidence that their investment of money and resources in this effort will be well spent. it certainly is in the clear interest of countries around the world and the united states that this response move expeditiously to stop this outbreak at the source. >> is it more about money, or is there more to it than that? >> it is certainly about money, and also about expertise and personnel. who can make sure we are getting the word out to people in west africa about how they can avoid contracting ebola. it also means health care professionals who can treat ebola patients.

there are a variety of things that are needed. for a more detailed assessment of what is needed on the ground, i refer you to the usaid and they will be able to give you a better assessment. they have personnel working in communities across the street countries trying to maximize the impact of response. >> is there any level of frustration, says the president has been making comments for several weeks, that he has not been able to get the international community to do as much as he would like them to o? >> we have seen commitments from countries across the world. we have not seen as much as we would like. i think you could describe the president who understands there is a sense of urgency. >> you said mr. klain will be behind the scenes. i am wondering if there is messaging in the administration, given the level of fear, and things that are frankly isinformation?

>> it is not a coincidence yet for the president talking to days in a row about this issue. he is a singular voice in terms of the administration's response. there are a variety of government agencies that are leveraging expertise to try to deal with the situation. that is why you see jeh johnson talking about the issue. it is what you seek medical experts like tom frieden and anthony fauci talking about heir role. two weeks ago you saw a news conference to meet here. lisa monaco and general rodriguez was here alongside the administrator of usaid to demonstrate all of you that we are pursuing a whole of government approach to the situation. i think that whole of government approach is evidence by you

heard the president talk about it quite a bit lately, but evidence by the fact there are other officials and medical experts who are communicating the facts to the american in public about what we are doing to respond to the ebola virus and help people understand what level of risk they face. >> my point, there is still misinformation out there. and we have seen some of the reactions of that habit across the country. is it possible that some of that is because it will have heard from so many different voices within the administration and do not have one familiar face to turn to? >> i do not exaggerate what they're hearing is the same thing, that the risk of the ebola outbreak in united states is exceedingly low, that the risk to the average person is exceedingly low in terms of catching ebola. there are two americans that have contracted ebola in this country, and those are two health care workers who have assumed personal risk to meet he needs of a patient.

they obviously were at a different level of risk than the average american, and the fact is people can take solace in the fact and understanding what we are doing to deal with the situation. you do not catch ebola by the air, only by coming into close contact with bodily fluids of an individual that is emonstrating, exhibiting symptoms of a ebola. it is important for people to understand that. i mentioned this to jim yesterday when he appeared on cnn. it is true when you appear on nbc, they know they are hearing from a trusted voice. we are counting on people like you who that kind of status with the american public to help them understand exactly how they are affected by ongoing events of the world. this is a terrific example of that. >> my family thanks you for

that. >> >> it is not. it is not. eople get information by watching your network, and they rely on you on what is happening in the world. the reason you have the jobs you do is because people trust you. that is an important responsibility. at least the people in this room take that responsibility seriously. is why we spend so much time talking to you about what is happening, that we want you to help people across the country understand what this government is doing to keep himself and help them understand what risk among what level of risk they face. in this case, that risk is exceedingly low for the average american. >> are you suggesting you are not surprised that republicans were critical-- >> i was not -- i regret i'm so cynical and that. >> you've suggested that politics have played a role. assume you will say this is a public health decision, not a

political one, but was there democratic pressure from those who are running in a few weeks to do something? >> i will tell you that the sense of urgency that everybody in this administration feels is not from a politician, it is from the american people, that they have high expectations from the government to keep them safe. >> >> those people who are paying close and careful attention to what members of congress say can probably find a quote or two from members of congress saying something like this would be a good idea. what we are focused on is making sure we are protecting the american people, and that is something that the president believes is his first responsibility. that is the sentiment that is riving this response, and that

is the value that is driving the decision to ask mr. klain to step into this role. >> do you have any sense when we ill see him? >> i do not know. >> i wanted to ask whether you are deputizing us as sort of ebola czars to represent the response to the american people. >> we will be happy to work with you on that. >> we would do a better job if we went to the meetings. >> the last couple of days, you have been at the ends of the eetings. >> the president mentioned his problem with a credit card in new york a few weeks ago when he was signing the order. did anyone find out why his credit card at a restaurant in new york city was not accepted? >> i'm hearing from this for the first time today. > he went out to dinner in new

york city and it was fortunate that michelle had her credit card. >> i am not able to speak to the current status of the residential credit card. i think the thing that's unclear is whether the president left a tip at the bottom of the executive order. >> oh -- >> it seemed funny when i thought about it in my ffice. >> a question about ron klain. >> they might get some pinocchios. >> when did the president decide to ask ron klain to serve in this role? had they already had a conversation when he said this decision may be necessary, but was it that the president needed to make a decision, selected somebody, all in a matter of hours? >> this happened this

morning. >> he spoke to ron klain for the first time this morning? >> i think -- we will have to get you more information about the conversation with mr. klain. he accepted responsibility this morning, and that is when the decision was made. >> and that is when the president decided that there needed to be a response coordinator. >> correct. i assume you guys are looking forward to the weekend. that is good. as self-anointed ebola czars, i expect nothing less. the president's schedule next week remains in flux. on sunday he will legislate on a campaign event in maryland. he will spend the night in chicago on friday -- sunday

night in chicago. on monday the president will have a couple of activities in chicago before returning to washington on monday night. his schedule tuesday through friday -- >> official? >> i do not have that in front of me. i think it is a little of both. his schedule tuesday through friday remains in flux, but if we can get you details of the weekend, we will great if not, we will give you more guidance on monday. >> he is going to go ahead and do the campaign event, does that reflect the judgment on his part is such that is appropriate for them to do that? >> the president has been time focus on ensuring that our response to this particular situation with ebola is up to the standards that he expects from his administration on behalf of the american people. i'm confident while he is

traveling he will have to spend time and energy on the ebola response situation, whether it is doing phone calls or receiving briefings. but the president is confident he will be able to both continue to work on the ebola response even while he is traveling. this is a decision we always ave to make on this, can the president do what needs to get done even while he is on the road, and it was the assessment earlier this week on wednesday and thursday it was necessary for the president to remain at the white house so he could focus on these things. he will continue to work on these things even while he was traveling sunday night into monday. ok, are right, everybody can have a great weekend. >> >> check with -- > thank you. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org

>> next a discussion about how texas officials are handling the issue of undocumented children entering the u.s. then a conversation about the changing realities of modern warfare and briefing on military operations against the isis terror group. on the next "washington journal," george university professor is the ebola response team leader. he talks about nonprofits like save the children are helping to ight ebola and an energy economist on the recent decline in oil and gas prices and we'll take your calls and join the conversation at facebook and twitter. live at 7:00 a.m. eastern on

c-span. >> this weekend on the c-span networks, saturday night at 8:00 p.m. eastern, a town hall meeting of events in missouri in st. louis. and sunday evening at 8:00, historian richard norton smith on his book of nelson rockefeller. on book tv "after words," questionable practices of the collection agency and sunday at 2:00 p.m. eastern industry. nd sunday night at 8:00 on c spanch 3, the life of booker t. washington and real america from 1964. a joint armed forces readiness operation between the u.s. and iran when the two countries were allies.

find our schedule and let us know about the programs you are watching. call us or email us or send us a tweet. join the c-span conversation, like us on facebook, follow us on twitter. >> the c-span city's tour takes book tv and american history tv on the road traveling to u.s. cities to learn about their history. and we partnered with time warner to go to green bay, wisconsin. >> we make the most and best cheese. the industry developed in each sin where everybody, farm family made cheese for their own use and recognized that we had an ideal environment tore raising dairy cattle and

cheese was to take that product before receive engineeration would only last three gays. if you made cheese into it, cheddar cheese can last for a decade. this was 1880 when the industry got start nd wisconsin. they would form a cooperative and build a cheese factory and hire a cheese maker and the cheese maker would work for the cooperative on shares. they tended to move around a lot. cheese mapts 2,000 in wisconsin. transportation improved consolidation among the smaller plants and that continued up until 1990 when there were 200 cheese factories in wisconsin. >> watch it on saturday at noon eastern on book tv and american history tv on c-span 3.

>> next, a discussion about what to do about undocumented youth coming into the united states. we'll hear from a tea party official, a democratic member of congress, a county judge, a texas land commissioner and a woman who was the first undocumented latina to testify before congress. this was part of the texas tribune festival. it's an hour and 10 minutes. >> good afternoon. thank you for being here today. i'm manny fernandez, houston bureau chief for the "new york times." on behalf of the "texas tribune," welcome everyone to the festival and to our panel today entitled what to do with our dreamers. a dallas ts are

businessman who started a web site supporting the texas dream ct known as h.b. 1403. veronicaes cow bar. ounty judge of el paso county. top elected official in 2011. director of rogram the national college scholarship fund for undocumented students. last april, she became the first undocumented latina to testify before congress. [applause] >> we also have with us jerry patterson, the texas land commissioner. former state senator who helped the texas republican party adopt

a more moderate position in its official party platform. we have george rodriguez, the south texas coordinator of the tea party patriots. he co-hosts a radio show and in 2011, became the first hispanic president of a major tea party group when he headed the tea party. congressman who represents district 23. he has been an outspoken supporter of comprehensive immigration reform. 2013, he invited an updocumented resident from texas, one to pursue a higher education right here in texas, to be his guest at president obama's state of the union

address. we will have 15, 20 minutes of questions from the audience. please silence your phone. in june of 2001, texas became the first state in the country to adopt a law allowing undocumented students to pay in-state television -- tuition rates. there have been efforts to repeal this law but all of them have failed. conservative activists and lawmakers will try once more to stop what what has become known as the texas dream act. the texas republican party calls for repealing the law. nationally, meanwhile, comprehensive immigration reform has stalled in washington as dreamers and other advocates are pressing congress for an overhaul that will create a formal path to citizenship.

dreamers have become an influential political voice and playing a key role in shaping immigration policy. gabby, i would like to start with you if i could. who are the dreamers and how many there are about 2.1 million dreamers.ead -- we are usually categorized as people who came before the age of 16. the majority of the students do follow that criteria. through thene public school system three they identify with the american culture. they seek the opportunity to be able to get a green card. hopefully after that, apply for

citizenship. >> congressman, if i could ask you, you've -- there's a lot of arguments out there for dreamers to get a path, a formal path to citizenship. i know you've made some of the economic arguments. what are some of the economic arguments that you would make? >> i think some of the biggest economic arguments that one could make is, you know, most of the dreamers are educated here in texas. and they have gone to our public schools. their parents have paid taxes, sales tax and other taxes, and they're educated here. but, you know, people don't want to give them a path to citizenship so they can even be more productive citizens in our society. and i just -- to me, that doesn't make any sense for us not to want to do everything we can to let that talent come out of the shadows and even make the american economy stronger. it just makes sense to give these dreamers chance.

dreamers evenese want to serve in the military an nationale to our security. why not give them that opportunity, when they want to participate like everybody else! else? me get you to jump in here. wrong with hb 1403 in texas? get the skunk on the table and just ask the question. what part of the word illegal do you not understand? the problem we've got is illegal immigration. here we go. to let me talk? the problem that we've got is illegal immigration. to only way we're ever going stop illegal immigration is to magnates in the united states. this texas dream act is one of those. the other thing we've got to to stop apologizing for for beingervative, americans. and somehow feeling that we are

orphanage fore the rest of the world. we can't do that. the reality is that we need to of this emotion, because everybody has got a sob everybody. there are billions of sob stories in the world about people who want to come to the united states. and that's understandable. we are the greatest country in the world. at what point do we say we control who comes in and who we have all why sorts of excuses, while we have allsorts of allowances, sorts of justifications, for what ageegardless of they came to the united states illegally, that's the problem. what we've got right now, you cannot enter a spurs game without a ticket. can't enter a ut game without a ticket. why is that different for entering the united states? >> commissioner, can i ask you to jump in? >> well, you know -- >> are george's views on the

of the republican party or is it on the mainstream? all republican voters, i think -- and the term extreme was -- let's say far right. let's don't say extreme. i think if you take all voters, considerablyight, to the right. correction. if you take all voters -- i'm here.ing myself all voters -- primary voters, he's in the middle. my point, i'd like to ask inrge, though, is we talk these, you know, all,-and-white -- first of they're illegal but they didn't break any laws when they came here. any kids? you have if you went to rob a bank and carried your six-year-old with you, would they be guilty of bank robbery? [applause] >> robbing a bank is still bank.g a it's breaking the law. >> but the child didn't break

the law when they -- got to be taken away, though. >> here's an interesting -- >> no, no. what you are saying is that because i commit the crime, then is some reason, the child not responsible? but we're -- >> that's exactly what i'm saying. [laughter] >> what we're talking about here is not that type of a situation. come int they have illegally. >> they did not. the child did not. >> they did -- child did not. the parents came in illegally. >> they were brought in as contraband. >> you're saying -- you're the children were brought in illegally? illegally. here what part of that don't you understand? >> i'll grant you that. i'll grant you that. i grant you that their status is illegal, but those who were wereht here when they below the age of majority by their parents broke no law, so in other words, when i hear this -- >> so in other words -- >> when i hear this mantra.

innocent?'re >> yes, they are. >> and we're gonna leave them alone? >> i didn't say that, george. finish. they are here illegally. they broke no laws. distinction. if they are here illegally, i agree with you on that. they didn't break any laws coming here. are we going to do about it? the real question is, what are do?oing to and if -- >> to prevent any more from coming. a situation near el paso where a two-year-old child was sent out, just across the border. are you going to keep that from happening anymore? you --know, >> can you answer? what do we do? them?we deport >> i would -- hey, until you the law as strong as possible, you are always going immigration.al >> but my question is, the topic is dreamer, what do we do? them?deport >> i would say yes.

>> okay. there you have it. >> i would say yes, because the same argument that mark made a little while ago about how are for thehey united states, the same argument can be made about them going lands. their native they can be beneficial to their home lands. >> here's the point. i want to carry on that. have boldly -- and i admire you for doing this. boldly -- >> because i'm the only one that will speak this way. >> no. >> yeah! politicians are afraid. >> you have boldly taken a position. i admire you for doing so. like people to stand up and have a belief system. advocated that we deport the dreamers. illegals, the other undocumented here? >> until we deport everyone -- deportour position is we 12 million people. do you want to live in a country that has enough police power, in ruby of what happened at ruben ridge, in light of --

that.ant jerry to repeat you're saying that the cops are bad? >> i'm saying that too many cops are bad. >> okay. all right. my local lawth in enforcement, in the dps, in the city., in the i don't have as much faith in federal law enforcement, because i've seen what they do. a classic example. >> can you talk about your own status and views and thoughts when george was talking about what to do with the dreamers? >> currently i have a program called d.a.c.a. it allows me to be in the country with a lawful presence years. it's renewable. and in december, i'll be renewing that. was to be given a chance to get in line, which is another line that we usually hear, i would do it. i would gladly do it. i don't think anybody in the havery -- he doesn't not like living in

fear. we do not like being afraid of calling the police when there's because we're afraid they're going to ask us for our documentation. like not knowing that -- the uncertainty of what's going to happen to us not being able to contribute, not being able to -- 2010, thelone, in unauthorized were providing 1.6 billion dollars in taxes. and today, when i was buying my lunch, the guy, nick, i didn't nick, i'm, hey, undocumented, please do not tax me. that's just not a reality, right? we pay taxes. we're contributing members to the society. [applause] that one of the things that's really simple, if we talk about it, like george ticket.ng, a right? but there are people that are standing in the line, that are saying, come in. our people in businesses saying let's go.

you know, we need more people to work here. and it's -- this is not as simple as somebody having a ticket or not. the reality is that the united states has broken immigration laws. reality is that there is a magnate and it's called calledses and it's politicians who do not want to fix this issue. put it so simple when we know this issue is very yes, this issue creates a lot of emotions, because we're not just talking about a number. not talking about 1 million people -- 12 million we're talking about individual lives, mothers and fathers and workers, individuals a degree,f who have who is contributing, wants to be limitedre, but is because there is no system. me to get away for green card. i got d.a.c.a. when i was given an opportunity to get some sort of status. but there's nothing else from

that. for too long,t even i think the argument that george makes is an emotional one. a rational one that opens up for dialogue and opens up to have our elected ted cruz, whoe doesn't necessarily bring a solution. deporting 12 million people is not a solution. we're not going to be able to do it. we don't have the manpower. the dollars. and frankly, there are a lot of hiringwho are undocumented people that want to be able to have those people have legal status because they workforce theyd are. but they can't. >> congressman, do you hear a of george's argument among the republicans in congress, or do you hear something different? >> i mean, there are certainly of congress -- i mean, the congressman from iowa, you a perfecte, he's example of someone that probably would line up --

in the blackt community? here's what i would say about it. >> say it. isin the black community, that i think president obama has job in outstanding making sure that people come together and understand that an important issue, people of all races. as a matter of fact, there was a poll i saw earlier this year just how high immigration reform was as far as get a pass in the african-american community. it had overwhelming support in community.-american i would say that the president has done a good job. and i think that, you know, as more people speak out about the importance of comprehensive and they seeeform what it does for the economy and mean, thereand -- i are, in a lot of the african-american communities, in fort worth that i represent, and around the state of texas, you know, the kids live and go to school there, you know, at dunbar high school,

predominantly african-american high school. people are friends with one another. many people in the african-american community have that areh neighbors undocumented for years now. say that -- so i that.disagree with you on but, yeah, there are members of congress absolutely that do take those extreme positions. >> george, were you saying that the black community would side this?he republicans on >> and you can deny it all you want. you want, because i have been informed where black residents have stood up and been issuevery angry about the of amnesty and open border. that when theact city of houston -- when harris preparing to open a undocumented minors in

were blackty, there residents that were fit to be tied that called out sheila jackson lee on it. and that was on youtube. i'm not sure why -- other than playing politics, and this is the problem with this whole issue, is you're playing than -- rather >> let me say this. i think that there is a lot of education that needs to go on. again, the president has done a great job of bringing everybody together. particularlys, because texas is a border state, people oftentimes think of this a latino issue. but guess what? if you go to new york city, the people living in new york city undocumented, many of them look like me. haveome of these kids that been coming over from central america, from honduras and thems like that, many of are black. some of them are black. people arein, once educated on the issue and see how this is a global issue, that regiont just about one of the world, i think that many of the people that have tried to

racial issue, a they've only centered on mexico and central america, but this is global issue that is affecting many people around the country. and many of those are black as well. >> george, how hard is it going be to convince voters like george that we need to keep the texas d.r.e.a.m. act, and it be repealed, at a time when there is this sort momentum to -- some of the arguments that george was how do you try to keep the law on the books? >> right. well, i think as a texas businessperson, i think my perspective is maybe a little bit different. littled a business for a bit over 20 years. and so i've had to be pretty pragmatic. i've met over 600 payrolls in that period of time. i understand the importance of bringing the sides together

know,king things -- you being practical. in that regard, i know that, as businessperson, all of us in texas really benefit from having an educated workforce. the value of that is really underestimated and not really discussed enough in this discussion. i think we as a society benefit by having a more inclusive and educated workforce that can maximize the potential. a pragmatic, on side, we're spending about $8600 a year to educate each of our students in texas. spend that kind of investment, and then when you theto the college or university level, and let them at that point not have the opportunity to continue their we're losingthink out on the potential, you know, individualeir potential but their collective potential and thus as a society. i think everybody wants a piece of the pie, but -- and there's a

educated we are and theively, more involved and the more of use, resources that we can we're going to have a bigger pie. and it's about. reality of 1403 kind of stems from -- we're talking thet less than 1 #% of students -- 1% of the students in the colleges and university. 80% of them are actually junior college students. we're spending a lot of energy this one suggest. this is not a voting population, to bes easy for them picked on and kind of bullied -- >> george, can you talk on thato much concerted energy on an issue that effects less than 1%? >> it is the magnet. magnet. contrary to what has been said, the immigration laws are not broken. they're not being enforced. they're just not being enforced. they're not broken. the headache that we've got, my friends -- and i worked on the

i have seenelf -- fined oresses are not punished for hiring illegal aliens. that,le you've still got the illegal aliens are going to come, obviously, because they can work. is, as far ase workers go, a workers program goes, the other issue is that we've got to not only enforce the law to stop illegal workersion and illegal coming in, we've got to do something about the welfare are a lotcause there of people sitting home watching jerry springer who could be out there working. the headache that we've got. >> let's focus on these kids. springer? >> let's focus on these kids. that havethe ones gone to our local schools. >> okay. go ahead. i'll go after. >> the headache that we've got is thatssue of workers when we did a study in in the -- in 1985,

getee how it would work to illegal aliens out of the fields that were on welfare theto work, we found that comparison of somebody receiving benefits to somebody out there working was almost the same. so why -- they're not dumb. get out there in the sun when you can get welfare benefits? >> george? >> okay. is that we have these children that are in our schools, in our neighborhoods. kids that have grown up here. they've gone through the adversities that it has taken to complete their education. working toem are support their family while they're going through high school. a lot of them are valedictorians, community leaders. what gets twisted about the with 1403 is that it's about taking someone's seat in that classroom.

1403 is strictly on finance. they've already gone through the admission process, through their volition, through their own achievements. they've already been accepted. is strictly about whether they're going to pay in-state out-of-state tuition. these are texas residents that have been here more than three years -- illegal.e they're illegals. >> okay. i'm going to complete. argument we hear about repealing 1403 is that they're taking space away from other students. that's not a valid argument. that's an admission issue, not is strictly finance. so these are students that are already paying an additional price, because there are requirements for their being in state. it's a three-year requirement until of a typical person from aother state, which is one-year requirement. the requirements are already tougher for them to meet. society, for us to turn our backs on these students that have been raised in our

and have gone through our public schools, that we've had this investment for, to turn tell them they don't have the opportunities -- i came as an immigrant from cuba. opportunity to achieve the american droam and i live it -- dream and i live it day. i want to turn around and try to help as many people as i can. am, as a private citizen, on this panel, and initiative to help these other students that need that helping hand. they don't need a boot. they need a hand. [applause] >> judge? >> you and i had a conversation panel started,e and it's pretty remarkable that we are even having this youersation, because when look at texans like gabby, these want in youru state. these are the very young leaders that make our communities strong, that make our educational systems strong,

strong.e our country and the fact that we are even talking about what to do with is really stunning. unfortunate that in our state we keep going backward. the longwe don't take view forward. excuse me, sir. we rarely have the long view forward. when you think about the long term in your state, you educatedlented, workforce, so that you can be competitive. when you're saying that people should be deported -- and where i will agree with take the we do have to emotion out of the argument. when you take the emotion out of the argument, there's no reason why we should go down this path. invest inoney that we deportation or boots on the ground or various other measures that try to create a crisis where there is none, it's not just a waste of resources, but what we're doing is putting a strain who areery taxpayers

wanting a competitive state, who are wanting to be able to progress. and so i think part of what we need more of, frankly, is more of what we saw, really exciting moments ago,ust where the commissioner pushed back on a member of his own party that is trying to pull the backward. >> commissioner -- >> backward? things.al my memory is not very good, but i agree with george on some points. sure we agree -- and i disagree with the judge here about the false crisis at the border. at the borderis and it's got a new dynamic now. all the -- ice it's called terrorism. not just on this border. it's on the border that comes in with the commercial airlines. but when george says that we have -- that there's nothing with the immigration system, that's the most bizarre

respectfully george. the maximum number of immigrants country on anhis annual basis for iceland is the is for mexico. mexico is a population of 125 million. 350,000. how is that a system that you can defend? you can't. it's not a system. is broken. it's nonexistent. and it doesn't serve our needs. me finish. the immigration system, number 1 thatderation should be which serves our needs in in country. country. not in mexico, not in central america, not in iceland. to benefit them, that's fine. but it's supposed to benefit us first. when you say, well -- and i saw this in recent campaigns. had four candidates in a race recently. not one of them supports deportation of the 12 million that are here. i know of no republican, including steve king, and i

that supports, deportation. it is a fact. they are here. the coyotes,port the criminals. to do say we're going wholesale deportation is intellectually dishonest, because it ain't happening. furthermore, 1403 is an economic deal. in-state tuition. if you say we're not going to allow them to have in-state but they're going to be able to pay regular tuition, bych is still subsidized taxpayers in texas, it's intellectually dishonest. i was in the marine corps. i was in vietnam. wereved with young men who illegals and they were damn fine marines. and they ought to have a right stay in this country. military service is a pathway to legal status. i think you agree with that. do you? >> no, i don't. >> well, you wrote that in the column you wrote to the express news. i've got a copy of it right here.

column. that in your but the problem with military service is that can only serve a certain number. somethingthem doing to make their status legal. and, you know, community service, military service. go ahead. i'm sorry. >> let me tell you, the problem, immigration.egal we will always have illegal immigration while we've got magnets. >> i don't disagree. >> why are you trying to -- 12what do we do with the million that are here and the two million -- they we enforced the law, would go home. >> no, they're not. are you going to go home? >> no. >> there you go. [applause] >> okay. i think we're getting somewhere. the only way he's going to go way he's goingy to go home is if we deport her. >> she would go home if there was no employment. >> no. >> if she could not get employment. >> there are statistics that show that people who are in extreme poverty usually stay

home. it is a courageous, super courageous act to leave the united states. my parents left behind everything, a comfortable family, a home, everything. but they did it because they so much.r children they wanted to give us a future. takes courage. >> that's fine but -- meand we came and -- let finish. we came to the united states. my parents -- >> did you or did you not come the wrong way to the united states? >> no. we came with a legal visa. >> and now what? so why are you illegal even? >> because our system is broken. it's not working. >> you broke the law. visa.overstayed our >> you have broken the law, because then you're breaking the law. if that's the definition of that you're using for someone who is not documented, we've all broken the law at some point. that's what -- all you're hanging on to, then you are mostly hanging on to the

emotional part of the argument. >> talking about -- what are you about, illegal? >> i just want to say, specifically on the education so the dream act is program forp dreamers. it is privately funded. from the many family in the who are more affluent who have started this and have given, we have $33.5 in the fund and it's growing. and the scholarship program is giving opportunities for dreamers and many of them here in texas to go to our texas schools. houston, and the rio grande area in el paso. do that because we understand the power of education. who go to that people college are most likely 80% more give into taxes. are -- theeople who majority of the immigrants, their average income is $36,000.

you don't give them the opportunity to pay in state, usually that's about $20,000 a have tot they would stay. nobody, no family could be able to afford that. so i think that the arguments the education part are there. i don't really think that anybody that loves their where they live, their community, would be against anybody that has the heart and desire to either serve in the military or go into anlege and receive education, that they can be against somebody wanting to fulfill that dream. >> commissioner, the 2014 republican party of texas calls for the repeal of the texas d.r.e.a.m. act. do you support that, or are you that?t >> i think the texas d.r.e.a.m. act is a symbol. thisnot substantive in debate. here's the problem with the act. d.r.e.a.m. texas had to do something. the problem is on a federal level. the federal level, the congress. and it's not going to happen as obama is president,

because we are so polarized there. fix it on a federal level, where there is a method arethose who are here, who illegal, who did not break our laws inment doing here, to -- laws in coming here, to obtain legal status. military service is clearly one that would work, but that's not available to everyone. there needs to be a method for our lawo did not break when they came here to achieve a status where they won't have to legislaturea state passing an in-state tuition bill are not documented who are here. >> would you want to see it stay on the books? >> i would want to see it stay books for the mere symbolism of it, because where our head is in the sand -- if we say, okay, we're going to repeal 1403, then the question that follows is, okay, do you do with those dha that are here? thesen have all platitudes and all these lines in the sand. until you say, okay, fine, this

we're going to do with the 12 million illegals, or the dreamers, you're about it.ng in sof >> let me say this. it's not goingt to happen because of the president. comprehensive immigration reform bill has overwhelmingly passed the senate. the -- wepass one in can pass one in the house tomorrow. and i have a very good feeling it. he would sign but the problem is that boehner will not let a bill go to the because of cancer losing in the republican primary, because the republican mean, you saw the ads during the lieutenant governor's race where they were outlandish language like invasions and things like that. more extreme elements like the tea party -- again.eme

>> -- gets out, taken over the we'reican primaries, going to continue to have this problem. when cancer lost, the decided they weren't going to do any more immigration reform for the rest of the year. we're at right now. doesn't have anything to do with the president. >> the problem with the bill was itreform was too big a bite for the republicans to accept, because it included a path to citizenship. that's not going to -- we're not ready for that now. saythe other thing, i would to you is that, you know, our congress is afraid. afraid.ticians are but the rhetoric in the lieutenant governor primary was focused on border security and i'm in complete agreement with that. a nation that cannot secure its borders is not a secure nation. >> our borders are secure. >> our borders are not secure. >> they are not secure. there's a clear difference in education, whether withe for moving forward

educating our texans or whether --'re going to go back wrdz backwards and reduce funding for education, and reduce the these dreamers to have an opportunity to get a college education. i think that's the clear lieutenantin the governor's race. i think whether we're going to forward or becomewards. >> there was no policy difference. all four candidates were in favor of the guest worker program. but the perception was in line advocates.eorge is perception carries the day, not reality. there wasn't a damn bit of difference. record.lic the tea party is on repealing the texas d.r.e.a.m. act? >> very. focused, very adamant. and contrary to what everybody extremists,t we're we represent the majority of what the american people want,

what -- not what latinos, not any blacks -- subcategory. what the american people want. >> no. >> no. >> no. tell yout me something. >> okay. just to illustrate to you why he's wrong on that -- [applause] again, comprehensive immigration reform overwhelmly passed. i think it had over 70 votes, tol past the 60 votes needed break the filibuster. if there was a comprehensive reform deal on the house floor today, it would pass. bill onhner won't let a the house floor. it would pass in a bipartisan fashion. polls outk at all the there, most business leaders, whole,rican people as a african-americans, latinos, should have we immigration reform. and so i don't agree with his

sentiment that they're in the mainstream of america. i think most people would agree, have freedomhat we of speech in this country, and he certainly has the right to as he feels.pinion but when you use words like that,on and things like and you don't correct people when they use that sort of party -- like the tea >> that's what you call it. >> like the tea party hasn't, going to be put in the extreme category. and i think that -- it is then.hat if you ask the -- if you ask people across the board, do you amnesty?n yes, no? you're going to get a lot of no's. you ask them, do you believe in securing our borders? you're going to get the majority yes. but when you get down to the details is where george loses his argument, because i spoke to lot of crowds and at the end of the evening, i had them on my side, because i went into and i didn't stop at the cliches and two-word bumper

stickers. more to it. our current system encourages more illegal immigration. circularo have a illegal immigration, nonetheless illegal but people would come work and go home to their families. they can't do that anymore, goause it's too difficult to back and forth across the borders. so what do they want to do? bring their families here. system encourages more illegal immigration and until we have a guest worker program, not a path to citizenship, where it's the guy that's working in the restaurant, the guy that's doingg -- you know, drywall, framing, working landscape, who wants to come go home, weit and are going to continue to have this. i want my border patrol, i want chasing narko traffickers, not chasing the guy in the hotel. do.'s what we need to >> why have so many texas republican leaders been, i comingsort of afraid of

out strongly and agreeing with you and saying, look, we need to books orlaw on the not? why is there a little bit of -- fear.s i mean, it's patently fear. and not much of this enough of this. also -- you it's know, i lost badly, you know. however, if i'd have had funds, i think it would have been a different story. that's a whole 'nother story. over it in detail and don't do cliches, they will follow. there's just not enough people doing that. >> we keep revisiting these old know., you when texas passed the d.r.e.a.m. act, it was -- they had support.n overwhelmly supported.part governor perry signed it into law. here we are years and years

later, moving backward. same thing with the border issues. some group to find to demonize, some kind of red meat to make it seem like i'm out there fighting for you. and frequently, it's the border. it's immigrants. it's hispanics. and so it will take, i think, a lot more of the internal debate the republican party to say, we've got to keep -- we've got to stop going backwards like this. >> the democrats are the they keep --use >> i would say both. >> i would say both. >> both. >> i would say both. >> raising the hispanic issue, problem, is a hispanic he's already said it. it's not a hispanic problem. yet that's what they keep saying. they've run on the idea of it. >> the majority of the people undocumented are not latino. point.st wanted to add a

>> it's not a hispanic issue. this will be the -- the 1403 apply to anyone, not just hispanics. so the issue of having comene -- the ability to and achieve the dream of an education so they could better lives and society as a whole would benefit, that's not issue.nic so i would still be here on this stage if we were talking about canadians, if we were talking about french. it doesn't matter. it's the ability to have someone that american dream, that have lived in our neighborhoods, grocery stores, work at our restaurants. >> the right way. that, through no fault or choice of their own, theyeing excluded, because don't have a piece of paper that they didn't have the ability to get. >> i'd like to ask gabby a question. you know, the term "go back and line," do it the right way. we're tired of people cutting in line and bumping out those that

doing it the right way. if there were a line in encounter country of origin, would you go there and get in it? >> yes. that's all we're asking. >> that's the point. there is no line. back to thego country of origin, there is no line, because the immigration has not -- does not allow it. i'd like to say it. the same quota as mexico. >> let me say thing about that. deferred action for childhood arrivals program, calleds this thing advance parole. you, you're it to able to leave the country and come back in. careful, because we don't know yet, but a lot of students that have visas waiting them in their home countries have been able to ask for parole and get their considered. before d.a.c.a., that was not available. there are currently four million people in the nation that could

right now get a legal status, but they can't because of arbitrary laws that have been place in 1996, the three and ten-year bar, one of them, people are willing to do whatever it takes, if it is going back to their home to come back and get a green card. i wanted to add something to what veronica was saying about going backwards. i do believe in this issue, trying to repeal 1403, we are going to go backwards. was the first state to do in-state tuition, along with california. be verytexans should proud of that, because they led the nation. they saw that they had an issue. lot ofw that there was a latinos -- and yes, this affects the majority latinos. when it'sk usually talked about, that's who we talk about. but a lot of young people were school. out of high they turned 16. they said, well, i can't go to college. why continue? so they said, i'm going to go into the workforce and go to

work. well, 1403 changed that around and has allowed for hundreds and of students to be able to go to school. than 1% of the population but at least it's helping people. there is a student from ut saw recently in washington d.c., and she has her degree in pharmacy. he's in washington, d.c. doing a residency there at the children's hospital, making ut austin proud. going out and fulfilling her dream. thealso contributing to society, being there, being able to help and support. 2001, we have 21 states that have passed this, similar in-state tuition legislation, and just last year -- actually, had this year, we have florida and the florida governor realize, hey, i need to do something about this. to show latinos that i'm serious about immigration or this issue. what did he do? he went behind it, the people

submitted it were both republicans, in the house and the senate. republicans are realizing that being against things like in-state tuition, 1403, it's really going to hurt their party. and the majority of the population is for it. new jersey did it. it.inia did maryland did it. and the states continue to add. is a goodalized this thing, and even if we don't talk about immigration, it's a good economic thing. it's a good thing for the country and for just the young people that live within the communities that are going to be affected. they get the opportunity to go to school. >> thank you. i think i'm going to open it up to questions, because we're that time.ards so there should be a microphone there. you can address your questions, either to the whole a specific panelist. and speak up into the microphone. >> sure. address mye to question to representative -- i

mean -- excuse me. mr. rodriguez, and i would like to take the possibility of deportation, the 12 million people off the table, since that's not really a possibility. to ask you, why is it okay for -- if this isstate tuition bill repealed and these student have okay forre, why is it those students to pay that money, why is it okay for the take -- and hate to use your word -- but illegal money? >> the government is taking illegal money? >> in the form of sales tax. shouldn't be here anyway. hey, they've got to pay something. [laughter] >> they need to pay something. [laughter] a --have >> do you really believe what saysay, or do you just things to be provocative? i mean, really. absurd, the things that come out of your mouth. absurd.ond

it's astronomical. >> it's okay for them to pay out not okaytuition, but to pay in-state tuition? out-of-stated pay tuition because they're not residents. what don't you understand about that? a geographicis definition. these are texans. >> they are not. >> yes, sir. texans. they pay city and county and state taxes. >> so it doesn't matter that entered the united states illegally? >> no, it doesn't. >> okay. definition.our >> that is my definition. it's a geographic definition. we're talking about a geographic definition. they've been here more than three years -- wrong.el that's >> but that's -- gentlemans the that -- >> let's get the next question here. i'm sorry. question. sorry. >> hi. my name is patty estrada, journalist from houston, texas. mr. rodriguez, by the way,

name.ful last [laughter] so how are the dreamers hurting country? give me just three examples. >> they're not necessarily country.he they're not necessarily. illegally.st here >> but they are -- >> they are here illegally. okay? illegalproblem is immigration. because somebody brought them in illegally. okay. get back in line and come in the way. >> there's no -- >> lisa a right way and -- there's a right way and wrong way to enter the country. >> show me the line. >> and my question for gabby. got your u.s. citizenship, what will be the you will do for this country? >> so i think one of the things me,'s really important to and it's funny. i dream of serving on a jury, i feel that's a responsibility and i cringe when people try to get out of serving

on a jury. they call in sick or say they don't want to. that i another thing would never take for granted is voting. i think that one of the reasons why we are where we're at is because not a lot of people vote people vote, of alsoust in primaries but during midterm elections. and i think that's really important. and i think that the other thing i really want to do is show politicians what it is to be a public servant. so my hope is to one day be able to servehe opportunity my nation, to serve my country, my community, by becoming a public servant. [applause] >> when you say "my country," country? >> yes, the united states. >> i have a question, a two-part question for rodriguez. before i do, he made several statements at the beginning of that i would like to correct about. he said apologizing for being

conservative. i think you can't just hijack what it means to be american, to conservative.as i think we're all americans. there's many kinds of americans. native black americans, americans, white, latino, all kinds of americans. i think that's not right. all, that creating this sort of immigration, being a magnet to attract people to come think that's incorrect. people are going to come here because this is a great country, of opportunities. but, you know, the united states in education and has a bad health care system. has higher rates. so i would like to, before you to sayn front of a panel things that actually -- my question is, why won't conservatives embrace what it embrace be american, in asity and participate solution that brings a solution to this immigration problem,

ourselves to the world? it's silly to think we're just door and note the let anyone in. and i want to know why the conservatives won't engage in a debate that will bring a we all areecause interested in finding a solution. >> okay. >> george? >> i'm not sure what you're really to go about in the sense hijacking anything. >> well, you said that -- >> okay. wait a minute. minute. wait a minute. the solution that we see is, the first step has got to be to secure the border and to enforce the law. >> but that's being done. >> no, it's not. >> securing the border is being done. completely.ee >> there is zero illegal immigration coming from -- you have it. >> but -- >> i thought you wanted my response?

that's my response. is it's not happening, and it needs to happen. happening? it's not >> i'm at the border. i've seen it. >> you can't claim you've seen cannot claimou evidence. >> there are other people with questions. there's some other people with questions. to get some other questions here. >> hi. my name is deborah. years of myu all 23 family's immigration history, just to let you know that i from hb 1403. i've been here since i was four years old. i'm now 23. and i graduated from ut austin may.past and the only reason i was able to attend this great university of in-state tuition for undocumented immigrants. hate that you all keep saying illegal. but, you know, whatever. [applause]

is calledhis panel what to do with dreamers. you want to know what to do with us? let us use our degrees. let us give back to the communities that we live in and love. and give me a chance to stop fighting for in-state tuition, because i've been doing this for a while. the been lobbying at capitol and making sure that students like myself aren't anbed of our right to education, and i hate that we lobbying the time halls of the capitol, trying to in-state tuition, when we could be focusing on getting licenses for our parents, them job security, making sure that i.c.e. stops rating our homes and work places. like let us focus on things that -- other things that matter. in-state tuition. stop going backwards. know, isnt to anyone -- >> stop enforcing the law? is that what you're saying?

>> no, no. not at all. i'm saying allow us to give back to our communities. question ask you this then. okay. let's say that we did go ahead compromise and say, all right, let's give amnesty to the dreamers. the thousands of kids that recently came across or the millions that want to come or that will be brought across in the future? what are we going to do with them? >> that's a good point. >> what are we going to do with them? end? does it >> i think that's why we need to -- and i wish all the -- >> where does it stop? all the energy that's put on this debate to go back and forth is really put on solution.o find a >> no, no, no. works -- it's up to us to find a solution. >> well, they need to vote. they need to be doing -- tell them what to do. they don't tell us what to do. >> well, the u.s. government, i taught that it is congress that writes the laws, right?

>> right. based one the laws what the people are telling them. >> and the people are telling reform.need immigration >> they're telling two things, that we need to secure borders -- we need immigration reform. you can't have border security without immigration reform. to know abouted being an american? american means being a nation of immigrants. --cannot try to hide this hide the sun with one finger. we're lying to ourselves if we build thesef we huge walls both in the southern that'sthern border, that going to end. but what we do need is to figure out how to reduce the fact that we have 12 million people who are unauthorized or undocumented country. and we do need to realize that there are people gaining from fact that there are people who are not here without a legal

status. lot of those people include president obama, the democrats and republicans and politicians that use this issue as a political it back andthrow forth. and that's just the reality. >> congressman, did you want to on that, or -- whoa.ean, again, what i would ask george is that, you know, if he thinks we have a problem, then i would like for him to call boehner up. back in november and ask boehner to put a bill on the floor. you have tea party influence. tea partycall some groups. we need the speaker of the house bill on theto put a floor. >> no. we have asked -- >> you're saying we we have asked the president,

your president. >> that is divisive. >> and he has not chosen to do anything to enforce the laws or protect the border. that is a fact. >> george, he is your president. again, you should call your speaker of the house. >> the speaker is not going to put forward comprehensive legislation. it is not going to go forward because it is too big. what we need is enforcement at the border. >> as a fiscal conservative, let me ask you something. you are saying you want to basically -- what you are talking about would be very extreme. it sounds like it would shut down the border. we do business with mexico. our economy is depend ept upon us being abling to have easy access between mexico and the united states. >> it is very funny that you would talk about fiscalness

when democrats are the ones spending like crazy. >> again, how are you going to avert fiscal disaster by shutting down our border. >> jump in. >> the young woman, the recent graduate from u.t., congratulations, number one. number two, the university of texas at el paso where they actually expand the definition of who qualifies as a resident for in-state tuition. it is to the university's benefit to have these talented students be in the university. citizens from across the border can enjoy the benefits of in-state tuition. we want for example and talent like you. come to el paso. we would love to have your talent. >> and the dream act is in el paso as one. it is one of our partner

institutions. >> next question. >> i would like to bring up the fact that those who are undocumented cannot receive welfare. zo whoever is sitting watching social nger who has security number. they are getting paid low wages to be under the sun. it is not because they are dumb. they have to because they have to survive. i have been here since i was 1. when you say go home, this is my home. i literally don't know mexico at all. so that hurts. i hope -- i share your last name, and we share ancestry, and i hope one day you realize how much you hurt these families. i wish i wasn't crying right now, but i am so passionate about this. i want to be a politician one day just to be able to say we

don't all want to be broken, and we all want to work together to help those who are here in the united states. i have always been an a.p. student, an honor student. and to see that america does not want to accept me and give me a job and let me contribute, it is really disheartening because i consider this my country. roger does not want to consider me a worker for you, i just hope to be a public servant who teaches completely the opposite to that. thank you so much for whatever you think you are doing. >> how do you argue with emotion? >> you are the first one. >> again, the fact of the matter is that the law was broken. what do we do? ok, so we go ahead and grant her amnesty. ok? what is that going to do for the thousands that came across

recently and the millions that want to come across? there are lots of parents all over the world that would love to send their kids to america. what do you do with them? >> you have a system that allows some. >> one more question? >> well, it is more common on what you just said and what the young lady very briefly said there. i am cherokee/chock tau. my mother. i am looking around this room. by our standards, most of y'all are immigrants. >> of course. everyone is. >> you are welcome for the houses, and we say thanks for the blankets. and those of you who got that. anyway, so my question is when you are talking about illegal aliens and children that were brought over as young children -- and i used to teach public school. there is a supreme court ruling

that says when those children appeared in my classroom -- and i taught in a title i. i had quite a few girls just like you. ok? and they are not -- what was it that you called them? contraband or whatever that was. >> they are like contraband. >> they are not contraband. they are kids. they are my kids. >> you amaze me. you are in charge of outreach in harris county, right? how did that work out? >> when they showed up -- >> we are having a spirited debate. >> it is what it is. you are extreme, and you are not radical, and you are making statements just to be provocative. >> with all respect -- >> gentlemen, the point is when those children showed us in my classroom, the supreme court said, regardless of how i felt

about the contraband that showed up in my classroom, i was required to give them as good an education as every other child that showed up in my classroom, whether those kinds were differently abled, differently colored. they could be polka dotted. didn't matter. i could not ask them where they were from legally. now, here is my question to you. if you are saying that these children, brought over here by their parents, are illegal and need to go back, i am asking choctaw/cherokee woman, however back does that go? i taught history and there are quite a few folks that bypassed ellis island and became part of the country.

i am looking at you irish for example and italian folks. how many generations do you intend we should go back if illegal by your deaf situation is illegal? if every person that came here to our shore without going through the normal documented way is illegal, how many generations do we go back? two generations, three, four, five, seven generations? how many, sir? your ge, how long has family been here? >> one side, five generations. immigrants in texas had names like mine. they came across the is a bean. so we have a long history of illegal immigration. the biggest period of that occurred from 1914-1918 when a million people came from mexico during the mexican revolution and people sent their children

here to get out of the violence of the various revolutionary factors. none of this is new. we can learn from what happened a hundred years ago. but again, we have to figure out what do we do with those that are here. we ain't deporting them. it ain't happening. i think you admitted that is probably not going to happen. so what do we do is the question? >> did you want to talk about your own family background? >> there is nothing to say about the family background because the issue is not -- it is a historical fact that we have never had a secure border. we have never had a secure border. it is time to do it. since 1848 we have not had a secure border. it's time to do it. it's time to do it. >> any other questions? i see one? >> i want to make a statement that i think is pretty telling, how one person who make

outlandish comments can pull behind this conversation. i see five people that have been contributing to an amazing debate to find an answer, but there is one person who is taking it backwards. i know the word backwards has been used a million times, but it is probably not as many times as you have used the word illegal. backwards. one person is all it takes. hopefully you will look in the mirror tomorrow and see who that one person is. >> we are not going backwards. we are not. >> we have one more question. >> i just want to sfon to your statement, and i want to say it is interesting that there is one person that is attracting everyone. that is what the tea party is doing. that is why we are where we are at. we just have to go out and vote, people. >> thank you, everyone, for being here, thank you to all the panelists for coming. it was a lively discussion. thank you very much.

appreciate it. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute] >> next a discussion about the changing realities of modern warfare. after that a pentagon briefing on military operations against the isis terror group. whetherorum examining the administration's strategy succeed.sis will tour takesan cities book tv and american history tv on the road. cities toto u.s. learn about their history and literary life. this weekend we

cablered with time warner for a visit to green bay, wisconsin. as --consin is known we make the most cheese but also the best cheese. in industry developed wisconsin from what was whereead cheese everybody, each fample family made cheese for their own use, recognized that we have the ideal environment for cattle.dairy cheese was really just a way to perishable product, before refrigeration would only last about three days. you make cheese, cheddar cheese can last for a decade. was late 1880's, when the industry got started in wisconsin. generally farmers in the neighbor would form a aoperative, they would build cheese factory and they would hire a cheese maker and the for theaker would work cooperative on shares. the cheese makers tended to move

around a lot. and there were thousands of them. in 1930 over 2,000 cheese plants in wisconsin. as transportation improved there was consolidation among the smaller plants and that continued up until about 1990 were only about 200 cheese factories in wisconsin. a book008 i publishedded on torture, and i was looking at war on terror, and as i wrote this book i realized that some of the using in the were war on terror -- i know there's odd connections between overseas policies and domestic policies. i started looking at what's and that let me to start teaching in the prison me to another book. psychologists and psychiatrists have studied what happens to a

to an, and

person, and they developed these very distinctive, one >> next a discussion about the changing realities of modern warfare, and the international fight against the isis terrorist group. from "washington journal," this is about an hour. to them lives of meaning. we say we prepare boys for life. in a lot of ways, those are some

of the things you do as an army officer. host: you were a career army officer but you are also a best-selling author. guest: best-selling is kind. i am best-selling among doctrinal dissertations in international relations, that is a very small group. coming out of west point, i earned a gross scholarship and went to oxford. i thought in desert storm, which was a big change. the army decided to send me back to oxford to get my doctorate before sending me to teach at west point. it was at oxford reflecting on my experience in desert storm that i became convinced that the future of conflict was going to look very different in the war i had been a part of. i started studying counterinsurgency in 1995.

i wrote the best and the worst doctoral dissertation written, it was the only one. time getting it published because counterinsurgency was yesterday's news. it was vietnam. i literally got rejection letters from university presses asking why i did not focus my talents on something with more relevance. it wasn't until after september 11 that i was able to get it published. recentthe best and worst book on counterinsurgency. when counterinsurgency became important again, it was read by dozens of people. what convinced you during the first gulf war that counterinsurgency was the wave of the future. guest: i learned that american confessional military

superiority -- i learned that militaryconventional superiority was so great that they would have to be crazy to fight us like that. it was reflecting on an army training experience i had almost exactly a year later. at the army national training center in california. the army plays in intricate game of laser tag and we were to fight tank on tank battles. a group of rebels crept up on us from behind and killed all our tanks with light weapons. the juxtaposition of those two experiences. fighting a conventional enemy and defeating it hands down. that being defeated in simulated battle made me think that i needed to think about counterinsurgency. attend tohe pentagon

counterinsurgency? it was not then? having written the book on , anderinsurgency observation by lawrence of is messy and slow like eating soup with a knife. province in 2003 and 2004, the same ground where isis is making gains. we had not been trained in counterinsurgency. i never had any army training on counterinsurgency until about a iraq.for we deployed to it was all tanked on tank warfare. we were engaged in simulated tank on tank warfare when we got a call and said turnaround, we need you in iraq fighting a different kind of war. the army learned slowly and

really relearned lessons it had learned in vietnam about how to conduct counterinsurgency effectively. or four hard years of fighting. thousands of casualties. we made the world worse in iraq before we turned around and made it better. one of the reasons i wrote this was to try to capture those lessons and make sure the pentagon does not forget the painful lessons of counterinsurgency that is paid for in blood twice. fights," brand-new book out by retired colonel john nagl. is isis a counterinsurgent movement? like you thinkng they should as a counterinsurgency? guest: it is an attempt to overthrow a government. case, the governments in

syria and iraq. it is a cross-border, multinational insurgency. from arawling adherence number of countries. it is a very difficult and complicated insurgency. it is so powerful that it is no longer fighting with gorillas terrorists -- with guerillas and terrorists. it is strong enough now but it is fighting as a conventional force. it is an insurgency using conventional time netactics. it is stronger now than the folks i fought against, certainly the sunni insurgents in al anbar in 2004.

host: what they consider themselves to be counterinsurgent? are fighting a government in iraq and syria. the have taken extraordinary step of calling themselves a state and acting like a state. collecting tax revenues across the portions of syria and iraq that they control. a territory the size of maryland. they are refining and selling petroleum on world markets. they have accomplished extraordinary things in a brief period. it is hugely painful as a veteran of the fighting in iraq to see that territory that my friends fought for, following a gens into the hands of a radical insurgency. host: colonel nagl, are we fighting isis in a conventional

way? presidente ends the has laid out of defeating and destroying prices are correct. do that,e intends to using iraqi, kurdish, and free syrian army forces on the ground with american air power and intelligence in support, i think that is also correct. theproblem i see with president's current strategy is the means he is providing, the meager number of airstrikes -- seven a day in iraq and syria combined. to the current unwillingness and that american advisors with iraqi and kurdish units is making it difficult for the u.s. to achieve its stated objectives. host: 1300 personnel over there. where are those 1300? largely in headquarters units. they are in baghdad. some of them are at the baghdad

international airport, now in artillery range of insurgents. we have apache helicopters in anbar that we are using. to the pointclose of the spear. they are not with the iraqi and kurdish units fighting isis. in my opinion, we need to push those guys forward. that does mean they are going to have to accept more risk. it almost certainly means that some of them are going to get hurt. better to do that now quickly, blunt the momentum that isis has an push them back from baghdad international airport. do not allow them to shut down baghdad international airport and stop the extraordinary media narrative that isis has right now that is attracting recruits from around the globe. isis is now the most dangerous terrorist organization in the world. it is more dangerous than al qaeda. host: here's a recent editorial

colonel john nagl wrote for politico. you recommend even more than military advisers, boots on the ground? as we say. already have more than just advisers. we have apache helicopters that we have used. in an escalation of the war efforts that i agree with. rubicon.rossed that we are engaging in direct firefights with isis forces from the air. from attack helicopters, which is different from airplanes. i believe we need to multiply the number of americans on the ground by a factor of about 10. because our advisers are so good, because our air power is controlled with americans, but

our air power is not nearly as effective as it could be. when we put american advisors on the ground, the tempo of air operations will increase. and the caliber of our opposition is not really that good. isis has been cleaning up against a demoralized iraqi army that is not well lead and not well-equipped. i believe it is comparatively easy to change that within a couple of months and 10,000 additional american boots on the ground. i strongly recommend that. sooner rather than later. host: something you write about in your new book, your experiences during the first gulf war and the iraq war. how are they different? guest: it would be hard for them to be less similar, given that i was using the same vehicles in both places in exactly the same location a decade apart. my first war, conventional tank on tank war against the

conventional iraqi army of saddam hussein, was physically difficult. it was dangerous. but it was not very intellectually difficult. we used air power, artillery, and tank iraq weapon -- tank direct weapon fire to defeat an enemy that mirror imaged us. we shot at tanks that did not look like ours. a decade later, i could not tell you my enemy was. i was blindsided continuously by snipers. by martin and artillery fire, by rockets. and mostblesome of all fatal of all, improvised explosive devices -- roadside bonds. that the insurgents in guard and underneath roads and trails. killed 23 of and the young men in my task force. the first war, i knew who my enemy was. the hard part was killing him.

my second war, i did not know who my enemy was. the hard part was finding him. host: why the title? first book is "learning to eat soup with a the process by which the americans and british learned counterinsurgency. it was a doctoral dissertation. it was in theory how counterinsurgency worked. this is a story about practicing counterinsurgency. very close range against an enemy who had to get very close to us and did so protected not by armor but by being cloaked in the sea of the people. they were fish swimming in the sea of the people, to use mao's phrase. the fighting was in close range. the harder fight was helping the army, the department of defense,

the u.s. government understand this war. a war it had not prepared to fight. a worry had not trained its people to fight. we engaged in- bureaucratic knife fights to change the way the u.s. military understood warfare. host: john nagl is our guest. for republicans. 202-585-3880 for democrats. independents.or talking about modern warfare. tying that into his new book and has experience in the middle east. we will begin with a call from donald in alabama. you are on the air. caller: as far as the isis is a morphing of what is happening in the middle east for thousands of years. we will finally defeat isis.

they will morph into something else. they have conflicts going on in .ibya iran is trying to develop nuclear bombs. we would be far better served, perhaps better served -- although we cannot leave the place -- if we could get our east.out of the middle i want to ask you something you may not know. about a conventional or nonconventional war against major powers. specifically the u.s. versus the chinese. do you think we would match up with them? defense, do you believe -- when will they achieve a balance with us? three great guest: questions.

we tried it leave the middle east. iraq at the end of 2011 and pulled american troops out despite having spent more than $1 trillion setting up the american government. 5000 american lives and more than 35 thousand wounded, many grievously. invading iraq was a mistake that you ares some passions talking about in the middle east. a smaller but critical mistake was pulling american troops out of the end of 2011. will bee that it generations, we will see generations of warfare and unrest for a number of reasons that i talk about in "knife fights." these are the kind of wars we are going to be fighting, not a conventional war against china. there are a number of reasons for that. nucleaap reasons for that. nuclear weapons put an upper limit on how far great powers are willing to go in conflicts.

the extraordinary conventional superiority of the u.s. military, despite the real damage being done to it by , the decision to cut spending on the department of defense, which i believe is a grievous self-inflicted wound on the military capabilities on the u.s. that is going to costu us. innocent people are dying as a result. and the u.s. are economically linked to an extraordinary degree. depends on american markets. the u.s. depends on chinese manufacturing. china holds aliens -- china holds billions, trillions of dollars in u.s. debt. were a war to happen, the u.s. could cancel that debt, that is a huge disincentive to china. china is pursuing some regionally aggressive actions. it is flexing its growing power.

surpassed the u.s. by some accounts in relative purchasing power as the largest economy in the world. i personally see almost no chance for a war between china and the u.s. as long as the u.s. maintains its conventional, particularly naval and air capabilities, in asia. i'm concerned that those are being unnecessarily diminished by the sequester that is limiting the funding going to the department of defense. we need to change that. york,seneca falls, new republican line. you are on the "washington journal" with retired colonel john nagl. yes, sir. turning i.t. down. welcome back, sir. thank you for your service. to serve as a that of

vietnam. whenreally irks me is politics gets involved in wars. let the generals run it. we would not be in half the problems we have. another thing with the isis, we need boots on the ground. we also have got to give the kurds more weapons so they can fight. they want to fight. if we would supply the weapons to them and turn them loose, i am sure it would help out a lot. with all of those points. i will modify one of them. thank you for your service in vietnam. a long, hard work of its own. politicians that should allow generals to run wars. it is the job of the politicians to find the right general for

the right war. one of my favorite books on the civil war is titled "lincoln finds a general." are equallyrals competent. some have skills appropriate for different kinds of war. i believe our performance in vietnam started to improve when westmoreland was replaced by general creighton. thew improvement over course of the iraq war, leadership mattered. that is one of the reasons the politicians it should choose their generals wisely and leave the conduct of the war up to them. to president chose not whenw military advice choosing to withdraw troops from iraq at the end of 2011. and is now not following militaryadvice -- the

has suggested it would be far better off if we put advisors with iraqi and kurdish units. were we to do so, we would see a rapid turnaround in the fighting. it would be good for iraq and good for the entire middle east. invalid -- wer have to be that narrative now because g hotties are flocking ies are flocking to isis. aboutar more concerned the danger of foreign trained jihadis with western passports than ebola. host: napoleon famously said all my generals are good. give me once