Skip to main content

tv   Key Capitol Hill Hearings  CSPAN  December 4, 2014 4:30am-6:01am EST

4:30 am
it shows is a little but of a deeper commitment to read the language is nuanced in such a way that you are talking about ethal support. lethal support that they are apable of utilizing. we want them to demonstrate the capacity to be able to intelligently use what we would give them. i wrote a bill in advance with 23 other senators. six months ago. now, we have a bipartisan agreement passed anonymously out of committee. we hope to have a hotline on it in the next short time. there are various senators with ssues. it is my hope that we are going to be able to get it potential he -- and i know this is somewhat difficult. potential he get it out. -- potentially get it out
4:31 am
before we go home. it is a strong piece of egislation that pushes the administration to words -- forward slightly more robustly. the genie is out of the bottle. it is difficult to see how we don't end up in a frozen onflict. we are where we are. >> is there somebody who wants to -- >> hold on, i think there's a microphone coming. would you identify ourself? >> my question is about the -- how do you expect will the white house signee bill? -- sgign the bill? >> is authorizing legislation comes on the unit it
4:32 am
authorizes, it does not demand. it passed unanimously out of committee. if it passes, it means it has to pass through unanimous consent meaning every senator has agreed to it. they would have difficulty be twins of be like this, should it occur. i don't think they would. >> what he think the impact of oil prices will be on pollutant? >> it is better than any of sanctions we have put in place. i had a group in yesterday. one of the great privileges that people like you and certainly people in tennessee give me is to be able to sit down with intelligent people like those in this room to read others from all around the country and world on a daily basis.
4:33 am
one of the things that was discussed yesterday was, does it make any sense for us to begin looking at opening up exports? to take advantage of basically going back to the iran issue, does it help with that? some of the countries that over time will be demanding a relationship with iran? does that help us strategically. back to this, russia is reeling. i think we saw yesterday. i have proclaimed they will be in recession this next year. i get back to the nationalistic fervor taking place. probably causes put into writing horse -- ride the horse harder. weak nations and weak states
4:34 am
sometimes do not do irrational things relative to outward issues. we need to pay close attention. >> we really are out of time. if i could close with a more. a coal, constitutional question. -- a philosophical, constitutional question. you said obama is an unreliable ally and it is hard to watch. now you and the republican senate are going to be in a position to do more than watch. when you think of the next two years, how much influence do think the senate can have on oreign policy? would you think about the role you can play in divided overnment?
4:35 am
>> again, i hope -- i'm very disappointed in the administration. i don't think there is a republican senator that spent more effort on a myriad of issues, working with them to come to conclusion. i'm disappointed not only in their approach but also when you have something working, their inability to coordinate making it happen. we have two years more. at the same time, foreign-policy is something we should come as a nation, do everything we can to deal with. menendez has been a good partner in that regard. what are the things we can do? certainly one of the things we can do is pass a state department authorization which has not been done in years.
4:36 am
i cannot remember the last ime. that helps layout little things. it causes the state department to pay more attention to the foreign relations committee. the effort of what they are authorized to do or not do. most people on my side of the aisle are strong, article two folks. the president is commander-in-chief. we need to understand what our role is. things like this ukraine legislation, we will address in meaningful way. congress playing inappropriate role in the iran issue. -- an appropriate role in the iran issue. there is a healthy perspective he rolled a president plays. i believe we can shape things. much of what we can do is helping to shape the american ublic's perspective. if you think about with the
4:37 am
administration does on a daily basis, they deal with things coming in over the transom. crises. one of the things the foreign elations committee -- when these occurrences come up, it allows us to think about how we deal with them on a longer-term fashion. that is a role that i hope we will ascend to. it has lost that luster in ecent times. i think we can have, as long as we handle ourselves in a thoughtful way, as long as people understand this is not about some partisan dig but about our nation's national interest, i think we can have
4:38 am
more impact than we have had. that is what i hope to achieve should i be given the opportunity. >> i am afraid we have to stop. thank you very much. >> from the foreign-policy initiative, we will hear from arizona senator john mccain. topics include russia and iraq. this is 50 minutes.
4:39 am
>> ladies and gentlemen, welcome back. it is a pleasure to welcome me back to the first session as we move into the afternoon. featuring senator john mccain and robert kagan. as you may know, the fbi is an organization created to make the case for american leadership. perhaps no senator's career has at her and body values than senator mccain. and i don't think any leader has advanced those by use than kagan. he is a senior fellow and serves for the secretary of state. thank you for joining us. >> thank you chris and all of you for being here today. i enjoy it every time i get the hance.
4:40 am
i can to give anyone who has devoted himself more to america's interests and alues. obviously, in his military service but also as, i would say, one of those people who genuinely deserves the term statesman. senator mccain is the least partisan person i know when it comes to american foreign-policy. he has strong views buddy voices those views regardless of who was in power. he knows more about the world than i do, and then anybody else i know. he knows the world and all the people who are around the world. he travels in a way that makes my head spin. that is because of his incredible devotion to america
4:41 am
and american principles. the world order that america has upheld since the second world war. it is a pleasure to have you here, senator. senator mccain in the next congress is going to be taking the role of chairman of the senate armed services committee. i can't think of a more important time to be taking up that role. let me start by asking you, as you look forward to beginning that position, what is your top priority? what things are you going to be focusing on over the next year or two? >> thank you all for having me today. these are interesting times. first, can i express my admiration for the work you have done over the years? the brains of the family resides in his wife, touring in.
4:42 am
-- tory newman. who continues to serve with distinction. an outstanding servant of our foreign-policy read -- policy. i think the first thing we need to address is sequestration. the impacts of it. we need to listen to our military leaders, not just civilian leaders. it is people like the general, they are very need brunt of sequestration. the air force and -- we have people on the ground in afghanistan. what general odierno is saying is we are not going to be able to defend u.s. national
4:43 am
security interests. i would argue when we passed sequestration, and nobody thought we would, we thought there would be a grand bargain. that was the motivating factor two folks -- force that bargain. we ended up with 13% of the budget, defense, taking 50% of the cuts. if you listen to those individuals, they will tie you they will not be able to defend the nation if sequestration continues. i don't think there is a greater critic of cost overruns and waste and mismanagement. that has to be addressed. right now, we are doing what we used to call eating the seed corn. we have to cut back on readiness. all those aspects of the
4:44 am
military where the concert went to his or not felt until later years. hey are very specific. i agree with them. i would say sequestration is the first. then we have another best to look at other issues. i have probably been to more meetings that have achieved ast -- less that have achieved less than any other issue. many hearings where we all recognize the huge challenge we all recognized the damage it is doing to national security. nd yet, we leave without agreement. part of the problem is there is
4:45 am
not sufficient leadership from the white house. it is also congress. a lot of the people in congress are old geezers like me. i know about aircraft carriers. i know about a lot of things. but the cyber issue continues to evolve. it evolves daily, weekly, monthly. i would say cyber is something we have to work together on. we have a close relationship for years. we are committed to working together. corker will be in the foreign rations -- relations committee. there is competition among staff. we are close friends and we will try to work on a common agenda.
4:46 am
i can't go to the american people and say we will repeal sequestration without making another run at acquisition reform. we have built an aircraft carrier, $2.4 billion in cost overrun. it is now having more cost overruns. i asked the chief of naval operations who is responsible. you know who is responsible? he said, no. we have everybody responsible so nobody is responsible. that is the classic bureaucratic response. we need to fix it. i could go down the list. i don't have to tell you. it has got to stop. it's got to start with fixed cross contracts.
4:47 am
with all respect to my friends, they lowball the numbers so they can get the contract. and then it it escalates and gets higher and higher. >> my contractor does the same thing. >> if your roof leaks, you hire it a guy -- not on a cost plus contract. my wife has done that, by the way. >> you speak with a great deal of urgency which i think many people in the room share, both the defense budget and the problems associated with it. i wonder how much urgency the american people feel to read even within the republican party, there seems to be many people who believe we don't
4:48 am
need to have this big defense capability. what is it for? if you're fighting terrorism, fine. you have drones. other people to do it on the ground. what is this for? an you push something as dramatic as an increase in the defense budget when americans don't know why they need to do it. >> could i complete my answer to your first question? i apologize for not doing so. what we are going to try to do is have initial hearings, the smartest people in america i know -- starting with kissinger and baker. and then with others, former national security advisers. military commanders like petraeus. have those hearing so we can develop a situation, hopefully, where policy drives budgets rather than the opposite. i know that is impossible
4:49 am
completely. how to the american people feel? the greatest frustration to me for a long time was the carnage and genocide taking place in syria. the pictures smuggled out had no effect. it was stunning and frustrating and heartbreaking to read i knew the people who were dying in syria. the beheadings had a huge effect on american public opinion. i could show you a 30 point swing in american public opinion about support or addressing isis. the appreciation of the threat we face. whether that should've been the reason are not, it was not. i believe americans are much ore concerned than they were before that happened. american public opinion is very
4:50 am
much leaning towards more significant action to be taken. the american people need to be told. after there were 8000 people ethnically cleansed in bosnia, which is a horrible act of genocide, president clinton went on national television and said, genocide is taking place. you are going to have to intervene. gerber that vote and that debate. many in my party were against it. -- i remember that vote and that debate. many in my party were against it. the president needs to talk to the american people about these threats. how serious they are. how impactful it is to the future security of the u.s. that is still not happening. the american people, there was
4:51 am
only one person that can talk to the american people. affected significantly the american public opinion. that is the president of the u.s. he has not done it. >> that is why it i were you are -- why i were you are going to have tough sledding. >> unfortunately for us, it is going to be overtaken by events. remember when we celebrated when the last american combat soldier left iraq? now it is 300. then it is 1500. my friends, sooner or later, we will have boots on the ground in the form of forward air controllers and other capabilities that the iraqis do not have. it is happening gradually. it reminds me of another war long ago and far away when robert mcnamara decided gradual escalation was the way to win the vietnam war.
4:52 am
when you tell the enemy you are going to strike them and give them a week or two weeks noticed, usually those buildings you see being destroyed are empty. when you keep telling the american people and our adversaries what we will not do, that sends the wrong message to isis. life is antidotal. mr. baghdad he, who spent four years in our prison camp, one time we had 25,000 prisoners there. after four years, he was released. on his way out the door, he said i will see you in new york. he was not known for his sense of humor. he is committed to seeing us or his followers in new york or a major capital of the u.s.
4:53 am
when you have thousands, not hundreds but thousands of europeans, some from the u.s., who are fighting in syria. although need to do was have a plane ticket to get to the united states. that is why the director of intelligence and fbi have said sooner or later they will present a direct threat to the u.s. >> there is a whole generation the room -- of americans who have known only two things. afghanistan and iraq. setting aside what they think america's role could or should be, there is a great sense among this generation that we cannot do it. president obama thinks, it is not whether we should or not, we cannot. we cannot use military force to achieve objectives. that is what afghanistan
4:54 am
taught. that is what people think iraq taught. do you worry they way the military activities being carried out now, that is once again going to teach a lesson it does not work? how do we begin to reverse this perception? or do you agree this perception is out there? >> i think the perception is ccurate to a degree. i don't think the u.s. had any choice as far as afghanistan is concerned. these were the people that caused the attacks on 9/11. the taliban refused to give them up. the u.s. had to act. the question is whether we conducted the conflict correctly. whether we got our attention diverted to iraq. i believe when the secretary of state, one of the most highly regarded and respected man in america, goes before the un security council and congress
4:55 am
and says there is hard evidence that saddam hussein has weapons of mass distraction, that was justification for the vote. we found out afterwards it was ot true. i will never forget being in baghdad afterwards. one of your favorites, he was one of the people in the opposition, said where the eapons were. he said, in the desert. i said, that is helpful to read in the case of iraq, the tragedy is after years of mismanagement, lindsey graham and i and joe lieberman were the severest and harshest critics of the bush ministry should -- administration, called for the firing of donald rumsfeld.
4:56 am
said we were going to fail. the surge succeeded. if you look at the number of attacks, the ability of al qaeda and others to respond, the country was under control. it was under control. if we had left the force behind to stabilize and keep the situation stable, we would have on that. i have been campaigning for president -- not president, for arson tutorial -- four senatorial candidates. there was an event. there was a man who said he was n the marine corps, in the second battle of falluja. it was the bloodiest battle of he conflict. we lost it is 6, 400 wounded. three of my platoon mates were illed.
4:57 am
he said, now the black flag is about isis, flying over. what do i tell their mothers? i don't have a good answer. this is not a technical or scholastic issue. it's about american blood and treasure spent and succeeded thanks to one of the great military leaders in history. we had -- petronius. you are going to see the same result in afghanistan. we had a meeting with the chief of the pakistani army, a guy i as impressed with. i asked, do you believe the taliban well -- if we withdraw everybody out of afghanistan, he government can survive?
4:58 am
he said, no. bsolutely not. unless we adjust our strategy, leave enough of a force there that provides medevac, that is huge in a country like afghanistan. close air support. forward air controllers. trainers. then you will see the same situation in afghanistan. hat is tragic. >> what about another area which has been tragic? you have spoken about it many times. >> can i say one more thing about afghanistan. they have a great leader. it is a dramatic change. he deserves the chance to govern. he has a working relationship with david abdullah dula. this guy is so good, so dedicated and so knowledgeable,
4:59 am
that i have great confidence on his ability to unite the people. if the battlefield conditions indicate he has the opportunity to do so. >> that is an important point. it is important -- worth aking. the average american thinks afghanistan has been hopeless for a long time. we see the administration is apparently going to be weighing the possibility of a no-fly zone in syria. is that something you would like to see happen? >> we've been calling for it for years now. this is a gradualism that is so frustrating. we hear that we are going to step up our assistance to the free syrian army. i've heard all of these songs efore.
5:00 am
i think they may do that. i have great confidence in general allen playing a very important role right now. i really am convinced that what we are doing may be one of the most immoral courses of action that i've ever seen in my lifetime or in my study of history. we are telling young men in syria that we will train and equip them to go back and fight against bush rl assad. -- bosher al-assad. while he increases his tax on the free syrian army and slaughtering them with a barrel bombs. we will attack isis and we will tell them to go back into the fight. we are looking for some kind of unholy alliance with iran based
5:01 am
on an agreement for nuclear weapons and then to china? it's delusional. this is the same outfit that sent hezbollah into syria which is what tipped of the momentum in the battlefield. they ran a revolutionary guard with plain roads -- planeloads of weapons that came in and now we will make some alliance with iran? it is incredible to me and frankly, i will not be a party to asking a single young syrian to go in and fight for his country's freedom if we are going to continue to allow assad to attack them from the air. it is immoral to do that. i value human life too much. >> is there anything you in congress can do or are we
5:02 am
prisoner to what the administration does or does not the side -- decide? >> it is authorized to go after the people responsible for 9/11 nd that obviously is assã©. the second thing we need to do is have hearings on both the foreign relations committee and in the armed services committee, again working together on this whole issue. we can pass legislation. for example, now to bob corker, we have legislation ready to authorize providing weapons to ukraine. does anyone here not know that we are refusing to provide defensive weapons to ukraine while they are being dismembered by vladimir putin?
5:03 am
we can't make that up. by the way, we're are sending them lots of blankets. you throw them at a russian tank and sometimes it catches in the treads. it's insane. of course, you cannot imagine the disillusioned that i'm sure you are aware, but you cannot imagine the disillusioned that the ukrainian people feel as we encourage them to overthrow and get rid of yanukovych and now we want give them weapons while they watch their country being dismembered? he is establishing the land bridge, as you know, and his next calculation will be moldova especially in light of the recent elections which narrowly the communists were defeated. >> what do you say to the argument that the u.s. goes ahead and provides weapons in any substantial form to ukraine that it will give putin of the excuse to go in and a much
5:04 am
heavier weight than he is currently going in? what were your response be if that did come true? if in response to our doing more to the ukrainians that putin sort of goes all in ukraine? >> we have a long history of helping people struggling for freedom. we could cite many examples, greece and turkey after world war ii after the soviets were about to encroach and our support for afghans after the russian invasion of afghanistan. history is replete with our record of assisting people not necessarily intervening militarily but helping them fight against oppression or invasion. there've been a few times when we have not. in this case, to think that by
5:05 am
providing these people with weapons to defend themselves we give vladimir putin further excuse -- i think, perhaps the only thing he might understand is if he makes further territorial gains that it will be at a higher price. one thing that russian mothers don't like is coffins coming back to their hometown with their dead sons in them. i have the exact opposite conclusions than the president does about arming the ukrainians. e've lost 4000 americans and our involvement in iraq. believe the population in ukraine is 30 million? they have lost 4000 ukrainian soldiers with many wounded. look at the sacrifice they've already made and we have refused to help them. i guess they are of the mind
5:06 am
that if you tell vladimir i'm reelected i will be more flexible? again, some of this stuff, you cannot help but get a little emotional about it. we were there when the 300,000 people in subfreezing weather demonstrated day after day, night after night because they wanted to be part of europe, art of the west. they don't want the clip dr. c -- kleptocracy they were living under that we saw in russia. russia is a gas station masquerading as a country. that is a mafia-run gas station. anyway, we need to give them assistance. what can we do? we can have hearings, pass legislation, hopefully force
5:07 am
with education of the american people changes and what is clearly now a losing situation. >> let me ask one more question. people like henry kissinger and others say, a, ukraine is part of the traditional sphere of influence and it is not a vital interest of the united states. and b, why don't we just cut a deal with the russians where ukraine agrees never to seek membership in nato and makes the necessary adjustments and its trade agreement with the eu so ukraine is kind of a finland? that is kind of an analogy that kissinger and others have used. that's the best way to pursue what american interests are in this situation. what have you said in response to that argument? >> i have the utmost respect and admiration for those individuals.
5:08 am
but i think it does not comport with the situation on the ground. the situation on the ground today as they've already taken crimea. they've already had the "separatists" takeover in donetsk and the eastern ukraine. if you're going to work on something like that. the only scenario i could see is return crimea to ukraine, get out of eastern ukraine, and then maybe we could talk about a finland divinization of ukraine. right now, the fact on the ground are does anyone believe vladimir putin is ready to return crimea which, by the way, was part of a solemn agreement made in budapest when they gave up their nuclear
5:09 am
inventory. the territorial integrity of ukraine will be respected including crimea. but some of us knew that as soon as yanukovych amerco and could not live without controlling and that was at risk. it was predict the bowl what vladimir putin would do. i'm predicting it to you now again. maybe the price of oil will have a significant effect on his behavior but it won't be soon. unless he thinks there is a very heavy price to pay, moldova is next. if you talk to the president of estonia and the other baltic countries, you will hear there is enormous pressure. they went into estonia, captured a guy, took him back to russia. does any american know about that? thanks cold war stuff. anyway.
5:10 am
i believe that it would be a workable agreement if somehow e had the belief that vladimir would get out of the ukraine including crimea. >> thank you. now let me turn to the audience or some questions. you on the end there. yes, you. >> thank you, senator mccain. i may ukrainian journalist. having spent a few weeks in the battle zone in real life, ukrainian soldiers put more hopes on your decision than in our own president. i have a few remarks.
5:11 am
the eu mentioned 4000 ukrainian soldiers killed. that's not correct. to my data it's at least two times more. t's a full-scale invasion. >> first time a country in europe has dismembered another country since the end of world war ii, yes. >> in my cell phone, i have ore evidence is of russian invasion in eastern ukraine than probably the entire russian embassy here in the united states. i have a couple questions. the first is global and the second is regional. i understand there are some political issues, but do republicans or someone in the white house have a strategy on what will happen in ukraine in one year? one year ago, no one could predict the isis offensive in the middle east, so what will
5:12 am
happen? we have a number of different terrorist groups in eastern ukraine and some of them the kremlin does not control. does someone here in d.c. have strategy? the second question, what are the main challenges for ukrainians in providing weapons for the army? maybe it's corruption or lack of experience for our militaries, so those are the questions. inc. you, senator. -- thank you, senator. >> the first will depend on united states policy and action. i think the situation is going to get worse. the guy it's not listened to a lot but is saying a lot is our head of nato. he's been very, very strong in
5:13 am
his comments in talking about the russian military buildup, invasion, dare i say it. i don't know the answer because it depends on american policy. we will be arguing strenuously n providing weapons. second of all, i can only repeat. i think vladimir putin calculates profit and loss. he calculated that he could take crimea and there would be minimal response. he then figured he could go into eastern ukraine. one of my favorites is when he said those are the russian soldiers in crimea. they were uniforms they bought from stores. this really echoes the old cold war days and that kind of statement.
5:14 am
all i can say is we will have the debate on the floor of the senate now that we are in the majority. we will make sure this issue is kept alive not only for ukraine, not only for ukraine because that is a compelling enough argument, but what appens next to the baltic? what happens to moldova? what happens to the other countries in the region? not only are you seeing direct threats but other countries in the region in eastern europe, former soviet union, making accommodations to vladimir putin because they see a lack of american leadership. that also has very significant long-term consequences as well. rest easy because we just confirmed an outstanding merican as ambassador to hungary yesterday.
5:15 am
the countries in good hands. >> pam dawkins with voice of america. what would your reaction be to -- can carter nomination to defense secretary? you touched on this earlier, but if you could elaborate, i would appreciate it. if there is a u.s.-turkey agreement on a no-fly zone, would this be official to the u.s.-led coalition effort to the fight against isis in syria? >> i have known ashton carter. he is qualified, in my iew. i've had the great pleasure of working with him for a long time. the only problem is he's the last man standing. his three predecessors and at least two of them have been very vocal about it, do not
5:16 am
have any influence on the ecision making with regards to national security. they are completely shut out. they have complained bitterly about the micromanagement from a handful of people in the white house. the second question -- what was it about? >> the no-fly zone? >> in my view, that has been vital and i've said that for three years now. we have to have a no-fly zone. you don't have to take out assad's air defenses. all you have to do is shoot down any airplane that flies into that area. i promise you that wants pilots see their friends shot down, they won't want to go there. that's what we've been arguing for all along. they probably won't call it a
5:17 am
no-fly zone. they will call it in aircraft exclusion area or think of another name. 'm not making that up. they will think of another name. i think that they are obviously moving in that direction. exactly how it happens or under what circumstances, but what we've always envisioned is on the turkish area inside syria and the turkish border. in my view, that also has to have humanitarian assistance as part of that zone. there is 3.5 million refugees, my friends. we just met with the king of jordan yesterday. i'm telling you they are terribly strained with the number of refugees in ordan. it is an incredible pressure on their country. 6 million people with 2.5
5:18 am
million refugees? compare that to the population of the united states and think of what that would be to s. the no-fly zone, in my view, i hope is not a half measurement i hope it includes a humanitarian part where we can help some of these people escape the barrel bombing which has been so horrible. if anyone here would like to, i have copies of the pictures that caesar smuggled out, these horrible things that were done in assad's prisons. there are still 150,000 people n assad's prisons. >> yes, right there. >> thank you. he discussion today has been
5:19 am
focusing on syria, but i have a question about asia. south korea's position is very much dependent on the relationship between the u.s. and china. what elements of the forces concerns you the most in the next five years? >> the chinese military buildup has been significant and accelerated. they now have an ex russian aircraft carrier which is a statement about the country's commitment to having the capability to project power. that is what aircraft carriers are really all about. if you look at their new fighter aircraft in the f 35, you will see the benefits of cyber. there is no doubt that continued cyber activity on their part has had not only military but the civilian side has cost us aliens of dollars
5:20 am
-- cost us billions of dollars and then the incredible ability to leapfrog technology. i believe that the chinese have lways believed that the last 200 years was an aberration of history, that it is their mission and role to play in the middle east, the dominant igure. we give them great credit for being wise and all seeing around the corner of history, but i don't agree with that. they have alarmed almost every other nation in the region which has caused concerns with alliances and efforts in oordination amongst all of those countries the likes of which i did not envision 10 or 15 years ago. a small anecdote, there is a
5:21 am
destroyer named after my father nd grandfather a naval ship of hours based in japan and about a year ago it paid a port visit to the port of denning -- danang. if you live long enough, anything can happen. the pivot to asia, two literal ombat ships. when you say you are going to pave it and you send two ships moving from one theater to another, i don't think it keeps the chinese awake at night. >> i'm afraid that's all the time we have -- >> one more. this one right here. we needed a gender balance ere.
5:22 am
>> we will do whatever you like, senator. >> cybercom. your first and second priorities of incoming chair, sequestration, money. do you have a plan to heighten the importance of the cyber threat among the administration, congress, enate? as you said, your generation doesn't really know much about cyber. it you are stuck in the older technologies. >> it's ok for her to say it. >> i still have a rotary dial phone. there's nothing wrong with it. it works fine. >> do you personally have a plan or know of a plan to educate our policymakers on the cyber threats and technology? > adult education.
5:23 am
>> this is the beauty of congressional hearings. you're really have to have in-depth hearings and bring in the smartest people in america not only from the military side but from the commercial side. i would love to see our friend that runs apple before our committee. mr. coke. i would love to see some of the really brilliant people in silicon valley come and testify before us. i think we are going to do it. the problem has not been a failure to appreciate the importance of the issues. the problem has frankly been how do you balance a person's personal privacy, right to privacy, and the requirements of government to ensure the safety and security of all of us? mr. snowden obviously made that issue much more complicated.
5:24 am
it requires us to make determinations that on one side, civil libertarians say the government does not have the right without reason to listen to your phone calls to damascus. then on our side, we have to monitor some of this activity. if we had not been able to monitor some of this act of e, maybe 9/11 would have been invented. that really is the crux of the debate here. i will require some very tough iscussion. frankly we are all disgusted. when we hear of some innocent individual who has done nothing that they are tired of phone records and everything else, they've made some government agencies examining, that concerns me as it concerns all of us.
5:25 am
there's got to be a good balance here and we have not found it yet. the other thing we want to do, i mention again, if there is an overall mission -- i'm not doing this by myself. we have good colleagues in bob corker, lindsey graham, mitch mcconnell trying to develop as much as possible a policy that drives budgets. we are now in a budget driven situation. that is not good for the security of the united states of america. if we can articulate a convincing policy to our colleagues on the side of the aisle -- i work very closely with jack reed. he's a great guy. he went to the wrong school. the armed services committee
5:26 am
has kind of been in ireland thanks to carl levin -- been an island. i don't see bitter partisanship within the committee. i certainly see it when we get o the floor. we get a significant resistance not just among democrats but there is still the isolationist wing of our party. 'm very happy to report that the internationalist a weighing of the republican party gained some significant victories in the last election. that was not the case with the isolationist wing. can i say i thank you for having me today. these are most interesting times. bob, thank you for all you do. i recommend reading bob's latest book. i got a lot out of it. we need to have this debate and discussion all over
5:27 am
america. i have town hall meetings all the time over in arizona talking about a lot of these issues, a lot of other issues as well. we have so little water the trees chase the dogs in arizona. we need to continue this discussion and debate including as many people as possible. that's why am very happy to have the opportunity to be here today. >> thank you, senator. lease join me. >> thank you, again, senator mccain. we will take a short lunch break and we will reconvene at 1:00 p.m. for a discussion about the chaos in the middle east. it will be the first session of the afternoon. thank you so much. national cable satellite corp. 2014] the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its
5:28 am
caption content and accuracy. isit ncicap.org]
5:29 am
>> will you be putting pressure on turkey? the new pipeline announced during -- >> it's another where we will just see what happens. i'm just glad our friends in europe canceled the pipeline that was going to go there.
5:30 am
it's a big set back for vladimir. >> among them are a pending resolution in the senate foreign relations committee. it will have to be ratified by the united states. >> senator? >> senator, can i grab you for just a second?
5:31 am
5:32 am
5:33 am
>> now president obama talks to business leaders about his economic priorities in dealing with the republican-controlled congress. he said tax and trade policy are possible areas of bipartisan cooperation. the event is one hour 25 minutes. >> the president of the united states. >> well, good morning,
5:34 am
everybody. happy holidays. i hope sales are good. i want to spend most of my time, as i usually do, taking questions. i want to thank randall and the rest of the executive committee for the opportunity to speak with you here today. let me just give you a sense of where i think our economy currently is, whats happening around the world and where i think it should be, and the chances for us here in washington to accelerate rather than impede some of the progress that we've made. around this time six years ago, americas businesses were shedding about 800,000 jobs per month. today, our businesses, including some of the most important businesses in the world that are represented here today, have created over 10.6 million new jobs; 56 months of uninterrupted job growth, which is the longest private sector job growth in our history. we just saw the best six-month period of economic growth in over a decade. for the first time in six years, the unemployment rate is under 6 percent. all told, the united states of america, over the last six years, has put more people back to work than europe, japan, and the rest of the advanced world
5:35 am
combined. and that's a record for us to build on. at the same time, what we've been doing is working on restructuring and rebuilding our economy for sustained long-term growth. manufacturing has grown. the auto industry has the strongest sales since 2007. our deficits have shrunk by about two-thirds, something that very few people, i suspect, in the brt would have anticipated in some of our conversations three or four years ago. when it comes to health care costs, premiums have gone up at the lowest pace on record, which means that a lot of the businesses here are saving money, as are a lot of consumers. on the education front, high school graduations are up, college enrollments are up, math and reading scores have improved. internationally, our exports continue to hit record levels. on energy, we have seen a
5:36 am
revolution that is changing not just the economy but also hanging geopolitics. not only is oil and natural gas production up -- in part because of technological changes that have taken place -- but we've also doubled our production of clean energy. and solar energy is up about tenfold; wind energy is up threefold. unit costs for the production of clean energy are dropping down to where theyre getting close to being competitive to fossil fuels. and as a consequence, we've also been able to reduce carbon emissions that cause climate change faster than most of the other industrialized countries. so the bottom line is, is that america continues to lead. i was -- andrew liveris and i were talking -- i was with his people in brisbane, australia,
5:37 am
and at the g20, what was striking was the degree of optimism that the world felt bout the american economy -- an optimism that in some ways is greater than how americans sometimes feel about the american economy. i think what you saw among world leaders was consistent with what we know from global surveys, which is when you ask people now, what is the number-one place to invest, it's the united states of america. it was china for quite some time. now folks want to put money back into this country. and a lot of that has to do with the fact that we've got the best workers in the world, we've got the best university system, and research and development and innovation in the world, and we've got the best businesses in the world. and so a lot of you can, i think, take great credit for the kind of bounce-back that we've seen over the last six years. having said all that, i think
5:38 am
we recognize that we've got a lot more progress to make. and i put it in a couple of categories. there are some common-sense things that we should be doing that we're not doing, and the reason primarily is because of politics and ideological gridlock. but i suspect that if we surveyed folks here, regardless of your party affiliation, youd say, lets get this done. infrastructure is one area where we need to go ahead and make some significant investments. anybody who travels around the world and looks at what airports outside the united states now look like, and roads and trains and ports and airports now look like, recognize that it makes no sense for us to have a first-class economy but second-class information. and that would not only help accelerate growth right now, it would also lay the foundation
5:39 am
for growth in the future. tax reform -- an area which i know is of great interest to the business roundtable. i have consistently said that for us to have a system in which we have, on paper, one of the two or three highest tax rates in the world when it comes to corporate taxation, but in practice, there are so many loopholes that you get huge variations between what companies pay doesnt make sense. and we should be able to smooth the system out, streamline it in such a way that allows us to lower rates, close loopholes, and make for a much more efficient system where folks aren't wasting a lot of time trying to hire accountants and lawyers to get out of paying taxes, but have some certainty and were able to raise just as much money on a much simpler system. that's something that i think we should be doing. trade: in asia, there is a great hunger for engagement
5:40 am
with the united states of america, and the trans-pacific partnership is moving forward. michael froman, who is here, has been working non-stop. ive promised his family that he will be home sometime soon. we are optimistic about being able to get a deal done and we are reinvigorating the negotiations with the europeans on a transatlantic trade deal. if we can get that done, that's good for american businesses, it's good for american jobs, and it's actually good for labor and environmental interests around the world. because what we're trying to do is raise standards so that everybody is on a higher, but level playing field. and i think that your help on that process can make an enormous difference. immigration reform: i recognize that theres been some controversy about the executive actions that i've taken. on the other hand, i think the
5:41 am
brt has been extraordinarily helpful in getting the country to recognize that this is the right thing to do for our economy. we know it will grow the economy faster. we know it will help us reduce the deficit. we know that it gives us the capacity to bring in high-skilled folks who we should want to gravitate towards the united states to start businesses and to create new products and new services, and to innovate, and to continue the tradition of economic dynamism that's the hallmark of the united states of america. i am still hopeful that we can get legislation done, because if we get legislation done, it actually supplants a lot of the executive actions that i've already taken -- which i've acknowledged are incomplete, allow us to make some progress, but theyre temporary, and we could be doing a lot better if we actually get legislation one. so the good news, despite the fact that obviously the midterm
5:42 am
elections did not turn out exactly as i had hoped, is that there remains enormous areas of potential bipartisan action and progress. and i've already spoken to speaker boehner and senator mitch mcconnell, and what i've said to them is that i am prepared to work with them on areas where we agree, recognizing there are going to be some areas where we just don't agree. and i think one of the habits that this town has to break is this notion that if you disagree on one thing, then suddenly everybody takes their ball home and they dont play. i think that theres got to be the capacity for us to say, heres an area where were going to have some vigorous isagreement, but here are some areas where we have a common vision -- lets go ahead and get that done, and build some momentum, start working those
5:43 am
muscles to actually legislate, sign some legislation, give the american people some confidence that those of us who have this extraordinary privilege of being placed in leadership are able to actually deliver for the american people. one final point that ill make: i started off by talking about how generally optimistic i am about the economic trends. there are some concerns on the horizon -- obviously japan being weak, europe being weak, means that the united states, even as we chug along, could be pulled back by global weakness, not only in europe and japan but also the emerging markets. so were monitoring that and were working internationally to try to get europe in particular to see stronger growth. but, domestically, the area where i have the deepest
5:44 am
concern is the fact that although corporate profits are at the highest levels in 60 years, the stock market is up 150 percent, wages and incomes still havent gone up significantly, and certainly have not picked up the way they id in earlier generations. thats part of whats causing disquiet in the general public even though the aggregate numbers look good. and one thing id like to work with the brt on is to ask some tricky questions, but important questions, about how we can make sure that prosperity is broad-based. i actually think when you look at the history of this country, when wages are good and consumers feel like theyve got some money in their pocket, that ends up being good for business, not bad for business.
5:45 am
i think most of you would agree to that. and weve got a lot of good corporate citizens in this room; unfortunately, the overall trend lines, though, have been, even as productivity and profits go up, wages and incomes as a shared overall gdp have shrunk. and thats part of what is creating an undertow of pessimism despite generally good economic news. i think there are some concrete things we can do to address that, and im going to be looking forward to working with the brt to see if we can make progress on those fronts as well. all right? so with that, lets open it up for questions. randall, do you want to call on folks, or do you want me to just go ahead and start? >> if i could ask the first question and then well do that. your comments, sir, have been consistent as it relates to tax reform. we have been over the last couple of days talking a lot about what are those things that are most critical for driving job growth -- middle-income job growth -- and it always for us comes back to investment.
5:46 am
the more we invest, the more we hire, the more middle-income wages grow. and as we think about what are those things that will drive business investment and that kind of job growth -- youve touched on it and you have been consistent -- tax reform. and to us, there is no single factor that could be more important. and the question is, do you think it would be useful to have somebody within your administration that you appoint and say, this is a priority to me. we will work with the individual and congress, and just see if this is a priority, if we could drive this through. theres a time frame here, it seems like to us, where theres something that could be done. both sides of congress seem receptive. and so wed be really open to working with you, somebody specifically in your administration, to help you drive this through. >> well, jack lew is here, our treasury secretary, and my understanding is, he doesnt have enough to do. so im thinking maybe we need to put him to work. let me get a little more detailed about the prospects
5:47 am
for tax reform. we put out a white paper, a general concept on corporate tax reform, several years ago when tim geithner was still treasury secretary. i think brt has had an opportunity to take a look at what our basic principles have been. theyve been consistent. the idea has been close loopholes, lower rates. we have discussed the possibility of being able to bring in some of the dollars that are trapped outside of the country right now, and in a ne-time transaction, potentially use that to pay for some infrastructure improvements. i think there is some openness to that. and when you compare what we put forward with what dave camp, the current house ways and means chairman, put out,
5:48 am
his principles for tax reform, theres a lot of overlap. there are some differences, but overall, conceptually, he also believes lower rates, close loopholes, a minimum tax globally that ensures that folks arent gaming the system but also allows you to be ompetitive with folks based in other countries that are operating on a territorial basis. so there is definitely a deal to be done. i think two big hurdles that were going to have to get over -- the first is the classic problem, which is people are in favor of tax reform in the abstract and sometimes more concerned with tax reform in the specifics. if we are, in fact, going to accomplish revenue-neutral
5:49 am
corporate tax reform that substantially lowers the corporate rate, then we have to go after some deductions that people are very comfortable ith. and there are going to be some winners and there are going to be some losers in the short term. over the long term, theres going to be less distortion in the economy, and capital will be allocated more sensibly. but in the short term, there are going to be some winners and losers -- including in this room. the question then becomes, are folks willing and ready to go ahead and make that move for the sake of a simpler, more streamlined, more sensible tax system. because, if not, its not going to happen. all of you represented in this room have employees and businesses and plants all across the country in every
5:50 am
congressional district, and if we dont have consistency and unity coming out of our top companies, then were going to have -- i think the likelihood of us being able to get something done is low. the second problem is one that is solvable, but is tricky, and that is paul ryan, at least in the past, has stated that -- and i think boehner has echoed this -- that they dont want to just do corporate tax reform; theyre interested in also combining that with individual tax reform, in part because theyre concerned about pass-through corporations not being able to benefit the way larger companies do. nd we are actually committed to providing simpler and lower tax rates for small businesses
5:51 am
as well. but what were not willing to do is to structure a tax deal in which either it blows up the deficit -- essentially we cant pay for the revenue thats lost -- or, alternatively, that you get tax shifting from businesses to middle-class and orking families. and so when you start introducing the individual side, it gets more complicated in terms of whos benefitting, what are the rates, how is it restructured. my view is, is that if we start with the corporate side, its a more discrete problem, fewer variables, fewer moving parts. we may be able to get that done, and then we can potentially have a conversation about broader tax reform. that may not be how the
5:52 am
epublicans view the situation, and so that -- and that could end up being a hang-up. one last point i would make -- and this relates to the issue of individual tax reform, but it also relates to one of the debates that was taking place during this lame-duck period, and that is about tax extenders. as a general rule, we are open to short-term extensions of many of those provisions to make sure that all of you are able to engage in basic tax planning at least for the next couple of years, and are not having to scramble during tax time, figuring out what exactly the rules are. but more broadly, wed like to see if some of those tax extender provisions, including things that i strongly support like research and development, are incorporated into a broader, comprehensive tax reform package. in order to do that, though, i
5:53 am
also want to make sure that some provisions that benefit working families are included in that package. the child tax credit -- hugely important for a lot of working families. the eitc, earned income tax credit -- hugely important for a lot of working families, something that has historically been supported on a bipartisan basis because it encourages work, but it says if youre working full-time were going to try to do everything we can to make sure that youre not in poverty when youre doing the right thing and taking responsibility. there is a college tuition tax credit that benefits a lot of families -- sometimes families who get caught, theyre not quite poor enough to qualify for pell grants, but they dont have enough money to be able to really manage college costs. so there are going to be some working-class and middle-class
5:54 am
and working-family provisions that have to be incorporated if we are to extend some of these other tax deductions and tax breaks as well. but that, hopefully, gives you a sense of optimism on my part, but cautious optimism. i think that there are going to be some real challenges, but we are absolutely committed to working with speaker boehner and mitch mcconnell, as well as the brt and other interests in seeing if we can get this thing done. i think the time is right. and you're right, randall, that the window is not going to be open too wide and it's going to start narrowing the closer we get into the next presidential election -- which always seems to start the day after the last lection.
5:55 am
>> mr. president, maggie wilderotter with frontier communications. thank you for being with us. and also thank you for explaining a little bit more what youre thinking about for tax reform. i also want to just underline that the tax extenders, until there is some reform that takes place, is really important to all of us in this room. as randall mentioned, it is about capital investment that really drives income growth for middle-class families. our company serves 30,000 communities in rural america, so that is important to us. one of the other things that's important to us is the continuing resolution to keep the government going. >> me, too. >> yes. can you talk a little bit about how we make sure that we don't have fits and starts again on that subject? >> i've been encouraged by recent statements by speaker boehner and leader mcconnell about their interest in preventing another government shutdown and i take them at their word.
5:56 am
the federal government budgeting process generally is -- how should i put it -- not ideal. ideally, we would have longer time frames, greater certainty. we would be able to distinguish between capital investments that are going to have long-term payoffs and short-term operating expenses. historically, thats just not been how the budget process has been structured. and since the plane is constantly flying, it's hard to get in there -- maybe jim has advice about how to switch up engines while the plane is in the air. so the tendency is just to kick the can down the road with a series of continuing resolutions. theres been an effort to try to get back to regular procedures and to
5:57 am
systematically look through these budgets. there was talk of an omnibus bill rather than a continuing resolution. and i think it will be useful for you to get directly from the speaker what their intentions are at this point. but the one thing i can say for certain is that no one benefits by the government shutting down, and it is entirely unacceptable for us not to maintain the full faith and credit of the united states government. and we just cannot afford to engage in that kind of brinksmanship that we saw over the last couple years. each time that happened, consumer sentiment plunged. it was a self-inflicted wound and we had to dig ourselves back out of a hole, despite all the efforts that had been made, simply because peoples confidence in the system
5:58 am
overall was shaken. so my strong hope is, is that we don't repeat that. and part of the principle that can prevent that is what i already articulated. we have to be able to disagree on some things while going ahead and managing the peoples usiness and working on the things where we do agree. democracy is messy, but it doesnt have to be chaos. and i've been encouraged, as i aid, so far by statements by republican leadership. and if, in fact, we can get ome certainty on the budget at least for the next year, that then gives us the window to work on tax reform. the good news is in all this is the incredible progress we've
5:59 am
made on our short-term deficits. nobody talks about them anymore. i will say that's one of the frustrating things about washington, is people are really good about hollering about problems, and then when we solve them nobody talks about them. we have made extraordinary progress in reducing our short-term deficits. we still have some long-term liabilities that we've got to worry about, and some of those problems, though, have been addressed -- are being addressed by changes in the health care delivery system, which has been a huge driver of long-term federal debt. i think i mentioned earlier i think i mentioned earlier that health care inflation has gone up at the slowest rate in 50 years, far slower than had been projected by cbo or by the actuaries for medicare. as a consequence, we've already
6:00 am
been able to book about $188 billion in savings over the next 10 years in reduced health care outlays. and i actually think that we can get more done as some of the delivery system reforms that we talked about and are initiating through the affordable care act are put in place. so there's good news on the budget. but now what we've got to do is to create a framework in which not only do we keep our deficits low and we're able to start driving down our debt, but we're also able to make some core investments that i mentioned earlier -- in infrastructure; in education, and particularly early childhood education is an area where i think we can make a lot of progress; in basic research and science. i was out at nih yesterday talking to a woman who had worked 10 years on the ebola virus in great obscurity until suddenly everybody thoughthe