>> next, president obama announcing his choice for secretary of defense. a form on the u.s. and global response to ebola. after that, discussion on the presidents policing task force. nominatedobama has ashton carter to be his next secretary defense. he made the announcement from the roosevelt room of the west wing. mr. carter will succeed mr. hagel. this is about 20 minutes.

>> good morning, everybody. please have a seat. it is wonderful to be able to announce the filling of one new job. before we do -- [laughter] i wanted to make a somewhat broader statement about the economy. ash is willing to indulge me. last month, america's businesses created more than 300,000 jobs. this keeps a pace this year that we have not seen since the 1990's. so far this year, over the first 11 months of 2014, our economy

has created 2.6 5 million jobs. that is more than in any entire year since the 1990's. our businesses have created 10.9 million jobs over the past 57 months in a row and that is the longest streak of private sector job growth on record. we also know that the pickup and the pace of job growth has been in industries with higher wages. overall wages are rising. that is a welcome sign for millions of americans. we have an opportunity to keep up this progress if congress is willing to keep our government open, avoid self-inflicted wounds, and work together to invest in the things that help with high-paying jobs. exports, infrastructure, streamlining the tax code, immigration reform, giving minimum-wage workers a raise.

it has been a long road to recovery from the worst economic crisis in generations. we still have a lot more work to do to make sure that hard-working americans' wages are growing faster. the united states continues to outpace most of the world. over the last four years, we put than people back to work va europe, japan, and all other industrialized countries combined. we are going to keep at it until every single american who is willing and able to work can find not just any job, but a job that pays a decent wage and allows them to support their families. it is worth reflecting on the fact that the american economy is making real progress, and if we can continue in this trajectory, if we can continue robustly, and if we make sure that those companies who are seeing profits higher than

any time in the last six years, that they are making sure that the workers are sharing that growth. then we can get a virtual cycle going. it can become a critical component of strengthening our national security because national security starts with a strong economy here at home. now, i know that some people think i announce cabinet positions on fake twitter accounts. [laughter] this is not the case. a year ago, when ashton carter completed his tenure as deputy secretary of defense, secretary hagel took to the podium in his farewell ceremony and looked out at the audience and said, i have known ash carter for many years, all of us today have benefited from his hard work, his friendship, his inspiration, and from his leadership. chuck went on to express his

gratitude to his partner for what ash has done for this company and will continue to do in many ways. i could not have said it any better myself. today, i am pleased to announce my nominee to be our next secretary of defense, mr. ash carter. with a record of service that has spanned more than 30 years, public service, as an advisor, as a scholar, he is rightly regarded as one of our nation's for most national security leaders. as a top member of our pentagon team for the first five years of my presidency including his two , years as deputy secretary, he was at the table in the room, by my side navigating complex security challenges, i relied on his expertise and his judgment. i think it is fair to say that in your when your attempt at retirement from public service, you failed miserably. [laughter] i am deeply grateful that you are willing to go back at it.

ash brings a unique blend of strategic perspective and technical know-how. as a student of history and -- he understands the united states. it is the single most provider of security in the world and he plays a key role in devising our defense strategy to advance that security. he is also a physicist. he is one of the few people that actually understands some any of our defense system was work. that has also allowed him to serve with extraordinary range. he has served under 11 secretaries of defense. he's an innovator that helped create the program that has reduced the threat of nuclear terrorism. he has been a reformer never afraid to cancel old or in

inefficient weapons programs. he knows the department of defense inside and out. all of which means on day one, he will hit the ground running. ash is known by our allies and friends around the world having served republican and democratic secretaries, he is respected and trusted on both sides of the aisle. he has been a close partner with our military leaders and he is admired by civilian leaders across the department because he is a mentor to so many of them. there's one other quality of ash's service that often gets overlooked. that is his true regard, his love for the men and women in uniform and their families. his relentless dedication to their safety and well-being. when he cut outdated, unneeded systems, he did it because he was trying to free up money for troops, to make sure they

have the weapons and gear they needed and the quality of life for them and their families they deserve. when our troops in iraq and afghanistan were struggling to defend against roadside bombs, he moved heaven and earth to rush new body armor and vehicles. it is no exaggeration to say there are countless americans are alive today in part because of ash's efforts. when our forces sat down for thanksgiving dinner far from home, or as our wounded warriors recovered in the hospital or when our fallen heroes returned to dover, ash was there. often on his own time without publicity or fanfare. i know ash will be there for them now as secretary of defense. we face no shortage of challenges to our national security. our combat mission in afghanistan ends this month and we have to transition to a new mission of advising and assisting afghan forces and going after remnants of al qaeda. we have to keep degrading and

ultimately destroying isil in iraq and syria. we have to build counterterrorism partnerships and new platforms. we have to continue the fight against ebola in west africa. we have to continue to strengthen our alliances, including nato, and continue to rebalance our defense posture in the asia-pacific. going forward, our armed forces will need to be leaner. as commander-in-chief, i will make sure we have a military that is second to none that , continues to be the greatest fighting force in the history of the world. that means we are going to have to bolster some new capabilities, our cyber defenses, how we deal with our satellites, how we are adapting our military and investing in new capabilities to meet long-term threats. we are going to have to work with congress on a more responsible approach to defense spending, including reforms we

need to make to make the department more efficient. that is how we will preserve readiness and keep faith with our forces and families and deliver world-class care to our wounded warriors. ash will be critical to all of these efforts. when we talked about this job, we talked about how we will have to make smart choices precisely because there are so many challenges out there. we are going to have to squeeze everything we have out of the resources we have in order to be as effective as possible. i can't think of somebody more qualified to do that. in his career, ash has been confirmed by the senate three times. if it were entirely up to my dear friend carl levin, i suspect it would happen really quickly. because that is the kind of guy carl is. carl has had a chance to work with ash in the past. my hope is in the new congress,

we get similar speed and dispatch. by the way, we will miss carl levin. i just wanted to mention that. [applause] one last piece of critical information that may have tipped the scales in me wanting to promote ash. ash is a big motown fan. [laughter] one of his favorites is a classic why the four tops, "reach out, i will be there." ash, i am reaching out to you. you have been there for us, our troops, our families, our nation. i also know he has been there for his lovely wife, stephanie, sometimes by skype because he has been traveling. but the sacrifices stephanie has

been willing to make, this is a team effort as is true for our military families. we are grateful to stephanie. she joined ash on a lot of those thanksgiving trips to see our troops and at the bedside of wounded warriors. she knows the sacrifices they are going through. stephanie, we thank you for your service. we thank will and ava, who could not be here. we know that they could not be prouder of their dad. with that i want to let our , hopefully new secretary of defense say a few words. [applause] >> thank you, mr. president. mr. president, mr. vice

president, it is an honor and privilege for me to be nominated for the position of secretary of defense. general scowcroft, my longtime mentor, thank you for being here. thanks to another longtime mentor, bill perry, who cannot be here today. and thanks to you, chairman and many other friends and colleagues past and future for coming out today. i accepted the president's offer to be nominated for secretary of defense because of my regard for his leadership. i accepted it because of the seriousness of the strategic challenges we face. but also the bright opportunities that exist for america if we can come together to grab hold of them. i accepted the offer because of the deep respect and abiding love that stephanie and i have for our men and women in uniform.

as we talked together in the past weeks, mr. president, we discussed the challenges and opportunities and the need both to keep america safe and to make a better future for our children. if confirmed in this job, i pledge to you my most candid, strategic advice. i pledge also that you will receive equally candid military advice. and finally, to the greatest fighting force the world has ever known, to you, i pledge to keep faith with you and serve our nation with the same unflinching dedication you demonstrate every day. [applause]

>> [indiscernible]

[laughter] >> [indiscernible] >> unbelievable work. how have you been? [laughter] >> good to see you guys. happy holidays. >> [indiscernible]

[indiscernible] >> thank you very much.

>> [indiscernible] >> following the announcement, the chair of the senate armed service committee issued a statement saying, "he is well known to members of the armed service committee, and has previously been confirmed three times two positions in the department. he will make an outstanding secretary of defense, and i support his nomination. john mccain of arizona said, "i hope that dr. carter fully understands that we will -- he will have likely limited

influence over the tight circle around the president who apparently control the entire strategic process. of you have some weighed in on the president's choice for defense secretary. well, i hope he works to the best of his ability, and i hope you -- we are avoid unnecessary wars. jim says, "my thoughts? i barely know the name ashton carter. i can't see where many could even hold an opinion? follow us on c-span, facebook, and twitter. president obama and king abdullah of jordan met and the white house. after the meeting, they made remarks in the oval office for about 10 minutes.

>> it's a great pleasure once again to welcome my friend, his majesty king abdulla and the delegation from jordan to the oval office. jordan is one of our most effective and capable and steadfast partners. laterally only in the middle east, but around the world. only in the middle east, but around the world. my personal friendship with his majesty is something i greatly appreciate. i always enjoy talking to him for his honesty and good counsel. we had an extensive discussion about some of the challenges we faced in the region. at the top of the list was our efforts to ultimately destroy isil, in iraq and syria. jordan has been a rocksolid partner in that coalition to defeat isil, and the jordanian military has been working side-by-side with the u.s. and

other militaries from around the world in making slow but steady progress, providing assistance to baghdad, providing assistance to the moderate opposition inside syria and to begin rolling back some of the gains isil made. we recognize this is long-term and extremely complex challenge, but it's one we feel optimistic we will be able to succeed in. i expressed my strong gratitude to his majesty for all the efforts that his men and women in uniform have made. we also had a chance to talk about the fact that this is not just a military campaign, this is also a diplomatic and social and political effort. it's a matter of winning over hearts and minds and isolating the extremists in the region.

i think jordan is an important leader in that. his majesty shared with me some of the ideas about organizing within islam to make sure the overwhelming majority of peaceloving muslims within their region and their own communities are able to step-by-step isolate and ultimately eradicate this strain that has done so much damage in the region. we had a chance to discuss some of the other regional issues of great importance. we share concern about continuing tensions between israelis and palestinians, and jordan has been a strong partner in working with us to try to broker a genuine two state solution and peace between the israelis and palestinians.

obviously, in the aftermath of gaza and some of the challenges in jerusalem, the environment has not been conducive for the sort of peace initiatives we would like to see. but we are going to continue to share ideas, recognizing that ultimately what will be good for the israelis and palestinians will be their capacity to live together side by side in peace and security and for palestinians to have their own state. i have briefed his majesty about our negotiations with iran and indicated to him that we would prefer no deal to a bad deal, but we continue to hold up the possibility that we can eliminate the risk of iran obtaining a nuclear weapon and give iran an opportunity to rejoin the community of nations. whether iran seizes that

opportunity or not is something we have not been able to determine, but we will keep trying over the next several months and continue to keep jordan apprised. we had the chance to discuss some of the important security issues that extend beyond syria and iraq, including boko haram, al-shabab, what is happening in north africa, and how we can more effectively craft the kind of working partnerships and coalitions to counter terror wherever it may appear. because jordan is such an important partner, because they carry such an important burden, including accommodating hundreds of thousands of syrians who have been displaced because of the syrian civil war, i'm very proud of the continued support we have been able to continue to provide poorn, a small, resource

country that consistently steps up and meet its responsibilities. as a consequence, i told his majesty here today that we are going to continue with a memorandum of understanding, but that we are going to be increasing the amount and we are going to provide, and we will be providing an additional loan guarantee, all of which is designed to reinforce the political and economic reforms taking place inside of jordan so that not only can the people of jordan prosper and be self-sufficient, but they can continue to provide an achor for important efforts that enhance u.s. national security over the long haul. so, your majesty, you are a great friend and partner. we very much appreciate your visit. we wish you and your family well. his majesty's son is a student here and i understand just

finished classes. hopefully he will be able to enjoy a good holiday season, although i understand exams are actually after the holidays. that's always a bad deal. it means he's got to do a little bit of studying during the break. it is wonderful to see you. >> thank you. >> if you allow, mr. president, thank you very much, on behalf of all of us in jordan to thank you, the american people, congress for as you mentioned the very gracious support to jordan, the budget support. they comes at a very difficult time. we are hosting almost 1.5 million syrian refugees, this will have a chairman this impact on jordanians. from all of us, a very gracious thank you to you and your people for this very timely support for our country.

andously, jordanians americans have been standing shoulder to shoulder against extremism for many years. to a new level with his coalition against isil, and our troops are very proud to be working together combating the isil in syria and iraq. we are working together to support our friends in iraq and the iraqi government. this is something we will continue to do with great pride. as the president alluded to, we have a long-term commitment to bring a comprehensive solution to the syrian crisis. i believe that the process is moving in the right direction. we had spent some time on seeing how we could move the process forward. we would also like to thank the president very much on his continued efforts to bring the israelis and palestinians closer together.

obviously, we need to be able to find a solution between the israelis and palestinians as we move now to this global challenge of extremism that all of us face, muslims, christians, buddhist, jews, hindus. this is a generational fight where all of us are fighting extremism all over the world, and we all have to fight together as a united front. we're very proud of this relationship with united states. as the president alluded to, it is not just against isil, it's across our region. i'm very proud of this relationship, very proud of that personal friendship and of the president's vision to alleviate the suffering of the region and his steadfast commitment to muslims across the world. >> thank you so much.

>> thank you, everybody. thank you very much. thank you. next, global responses to ebola. the creation of the president's policing task force. then, a discussion on the effectiveness of the u.s. prison system. >> tomorrow, a memorial service will be held for marion berry at the washington convention center. speakers for the invent include urbanjackson and national league chair mark morreale. live coverage begins at 11:00 a.m. on c-span. here are some of the programs you'll will find this weekend on the c-span network. saturday at 11:00 a.m. eastern on c-span, live coverage of the

memorial service for marion berry. :00 p.m. onng at it c-span's q&a -- sunday evening t it :00 -- how thecalo on northeast u.s. was not always a haven of racial equality and support of african-american civil rights. sunday at noon, are live conversation with arthur brooks. e-mails, phone calls, and tweets. on american history tv on --pan3, tonight at it :00 university of michigan professor on female slaves in the law. :00, james baker on the fall of the berlin wall and the liberation of eastern europe. find a complete television schedule at c-span.org and let

us know what you think about the programs you're watching. call us at the following number. e-mails at the following address. send us a tweet. join the c-span conversation, like us on facebook, follow us on twitter. >> next, a look at the response to ebola and the challenges ahead with dr. anthony fauci and response coordinator for the white house ron klain. held by georgetown university, this is one hour. [applause] >> thank you very thank you for being here this morning for a very important conversation for an urgent challenge that we face as a global community.

over the course of the last year, we have been engaged in a conversation regarding the future of the university. how in the face of a set of new disruptions that are really changing the ways in which higher education is understood and perhaps delivered, we have been wrestling with what it means for us. what do we need to protect and embrace? what do we need to respond to in terms of some of the challenges? as we thought about our history, and we have thought about what it means, the idea, the purpose of the university, we have identified three interlocking elements, three characteristics -- service is the underlying framework in which we do all of this work. they are inextricably linked, they are mutually reinforcing elements. we are committed to the formation of our young people. to the inquiry, the scholarship and research of our faculty and

as a university community, to contributing to the common good wherever and whenever we can. the issue we are going to discuss this morning, the ebola crisis that has unfolded over the last 12 months, is one that has engaged our university community in each one of those dimensions. we sought to ensure our young people had the opportunity to understand the implications and the background, the history, the ideology of the disease. and also to understand what kinds of responsibilities we have in moments like this. our faculty have engaged in a wide variety of efforts in exploring and research and scholarship, the nature of this disease. as a university community we , gather here in moments like this, we have throughout the

fall, trying to understand the nature of our shared responsibilities to one another. we have an extraordinary opportunity to be with two exceptional people who are more than any in the country responding to this challenge. it is a privilege to be in conversation with them. i'm going to start off. we will go a half an hour with some questions i will ask and then we will bring a microphone and we'll take another half hour of questions from all of you. let's get started. tony, this is a disease we have known about since 1976. we have seen other iterations of it over these course of these last 40 years, 25 different experiences we have had dealing with this as a global community. over the last 12 months, we have had a particularly intense experience syria can you give us

a sense of the ark, the narrative, we are engaged in now as it relates to ebola? >> thank you, jack. ebola is a disease in animals, it is not a disease that has adapted itself evolutionarily to humans. it is in animals and then it jumps into humans and spreads by well-defined ways. in 1976, and it likely existed before 1976, it was first recognized almost simultaneously in sight year in the democratic republic of congo and sudan in which there was an outbreak controlled by the way we are controlling it, identification, isolation, contact tracing, and keeping people who are sick away from other individuals, or if you are

taking care of them, in a way where you are protected. every one of the epidemics jack mentioned, all 24 of them, ranging in size from two people, to the second largest one in uganda in 2000, which had 400 people. they were all able to be put down in the sense of controlled. the arc jack is talking about is something that is unprecedented because of what i referred to when i talk about this as the perfect storm. the perfect storm is you have a disease that is an emerging infection that jumps to humans that has been able to be controlled because prior outbreaks were fundamentally geographically restricted in areas that, the bad news is that it was remote and tough to get people there. the good news is that it was remote because it was easy to isolate. the perfect storm of the current arc is that you have an outbreak

in an area of africa, west africa, that has not historically seen ebola in a highly populated area with porous borders, where even though the artificial borders that were made, that people have relationships across borders. they are constantly going from one country to another. when you look at the map of west africa, guinea wraps itself around sierra leone and liberia. also, you have an issue we have , it is an before issue in big cities. so we have an out rate that percolated a bit in the very early part of the spring and then started to explode to the point where we now have an extraordinary situation. 17,800 cases. 6,700 deaths, likely an underestimate, with waves of the epidemic. it looked like liberia was the

worst one month ago. got some better control, even though we do not claim victory because their may be outbreaks. and now we have sierra leone, more cases last week than there had been in liberia. the issue of the arc is doing this in sierra leone, this in liberia, guinea is kind of like this. that is the way ebola works. it comes in waves. even though we are making progress, we are still in a very critical, serious situation. the thing about ebola, unlike other diseases, when the trajectory goes down, almost by itself, it will disappear. ebola, if there is one case, one case can ignite another explosion.

it is one of those unusual diseases that you have to really put every ember and every spark out. we are far from that right now. >> thank you, tony. ron, tony has spent his career engaged in addressing infectious diseases. your ownminding business when the president called you and said we need you to help us develop your national response. what was it like in those early days? how did you come to terms with the challenges you faced in this new role? tell us about the learning curve and how you were able to close some of that curve, and what have been your impressions, your experiences in the six weeks on the job? >> well, so, when the president asked me to come do this, i was minding my own business. i was teaching a course at georgetown. i see several of my students in the front row. it is good to see them again.

but i think that the president asked me to do this based on my experience coordinating other complex, interagency projects we've had in the federal government, most recently the recovery act, almost a trillion dollars in federal spending in the first two years of the administration. his request was to try to coordinate what we call the whole of government response. we have every single agency working on some element of fighting ebola at home or overseas. and for me, you know, i have been able to climb the learning curve thanks to experts like tony fauci and tom friedman and various other experts. my major objective in the job is just to make sure that all of our agencies are working together, we are identifying problems and reallocating , resources. we are getting decisions to the president for him to make about our response and making the difficult policy choices that need to be made. i think the thing that has been -- not surprising, but humbling

every day is the vast array of people who are acting selflessly to fight this disease every single day. we are sitting here today, my favorite spot on planet earth, and while we are sitting here, there are hundreds of volunteers health care workers in ebola treatment units in care centers sierra leone, government employees who have taken voluntary leave, reassignment to fight this disease on the front lines, putting themselves at risk, doing the most important work that can be done to battle this epidemic. and the chance to meet with those folks and do whatever i can to facilitate their work is the most humbling part of the job and the most important part of the job. >> tony, take us into the perfect storm. why west africa? why are things appearing to

stabilize in liberia, but on the increase in guinea and sierra leone? what is it that we can understand about the nature of this that explains some of the phenomenon? >> what this really brings out, and i hope, if there is something good that comes out of this, the realization of how, when you do not have a minimum modicum of health care infrastructure, how vulnerable you are to so many things. and then when something as cataclysmic as a highly lethal disease inserts itself into the community, do you realize how that lack of infrastructure and ability to do just minimum health care type delivery can be so destructive to a society. what i hope comes out of this is the realization by the countries

themselves, but the world, the wealthy countries, the organizations, to realize how we can build sustainable infrastructure. you've heard ron and i and tom friedman and sylvia burwell say, not in a cavalier way, that it is highly unlikely -- you do not say impossible, because you never say that in biology. highly unlikely we would have an ebola outbreak in the united states. the reason is because we have a health care system that will not allow that to happen. so one of the things that is so important for the world to realize, that we will end this outbreak in west africa in collaboration with our west african partners. but this would be a terrible thing if we let the opportunity go by without saying we need to

leave an infrastructure, or the beginning of a direction to an infrastructure, to prevent ebola, and what about malaria? what about tuberculosis? there are some things that can be addressed just with a modest turning of the knob. it is amazing how many people who we are following that we want to make sure they do not have ebola, that have malaria. it really hits you between the eyes that malaria is taken so for granted and yet it kills close to 700,000 people each year, almost all of which are african babies. so this has got to be a shake the cage moment to realize that. >> i think building on what tony

said, one of the other tragedies of the ebola tragedy is the collapse of the health care systems, such as they were in these countries. immunization has plummeted to near zero. i had the sad duty of speaking at the funeral of a doctor last week who was a missionary physician who was not treating ebola patience, but died from ebola because the level of infection in the health care system is so high. when we count of the number of deaths from ebola in these countries, we also need to count the other kinds of human loss in these countries from the rise of other health care problems. that is one point. the other thing is, and i am sure we will talk about this, the president has submitted a funding request to the congress, which has been getting favorable consideration. we are grateful for their response to this. part of that request is investment in a global health security agenda to build the capacity to detect outbreaks like this earlier in other countries and to get on top of

them earlier so we do not see the kind of escalation, hopefully, we saw in these three nations. >> just building on that point, the first death i believe was one year ago tomorrow. and as we were describing earlier, through the course of the spring and summer, the numbers began to climb. what have we learned about our global governance, our capacities for global governance on issues like this? it did take some time for us as a global community to respond. >> ron mentioned the global health security agenda. if we had a functioning agenda, to be able to recognize those first cases in guinea in december of 2013, i would say with some degree of confidence that we would not be where we were right now.

we would have been able to do the kind of identification and contact tracing that could have put that out. >> let me ask you both. what are the tools we have available to us for constructing a global public health security agenda? what kind of resources or institutional structures, where do we go to put this in place? >> we have to work with the w.h.o. and other organizations. they are an important structure for all this. i think that in this case, america has to lead. it has led. and i think it has led for three reasons. first of all, this is a health problem for the united states. as long as there are people getting ebola in west africa, we are going to have people get it in the united states. not an outbreak, not an

epidemic, but occasional cases. health care workers will come back infected. this is a problem for us. secondly, it is a national security challenge to see this kind of devastation in west africa. that is something we have to respond to. finally it is a humanitarian , crisis to see this of a -- loss of life and devastation. united states has led this response. we've had great partners. we are seeing a great response from the united kingdom, france, even china has mobilized its largest health response, in response to this crisis. we have doctors from cuba working in sierra leone right now. so it has been a global response. our leadership has been critical and is something the american people can take pride in. >> thank you. if there were other elements in the current structure for addressing a challenge like this, are they needed? are their existing elements that need to be used more

effectively or efficiently? >> well we need to expand what we have. you can't underestimate what it means to have a country be able to do it themselves ultimately. i think the classic example of that, and it was really almost a foundation for so many other things, including when we developed -- there are many people who do what paul farmer did in haiti and rwanda, where you do not just go in and help people and get out. you go in and you train people and you make a situation where they will stay and they will teach others and it will become a self-sustaining issue. you do it. you train someone. they do it and train someone.

we have that experience, 30 years ago when i became director, we set up a unit of exchange back-and-forth in mali. we had trained people who were actually global health students who came from mali to nih. that turned out to be an interesting model because it started off focusing just on malaria. now, the people who were trained there and who trained people, in that area, they have an infrastructure that made it very easy when the case went to mali, they never would have been able to do that if they did not have that. so we really need to continue to make it sustainable in the countries that are involved. >> there is a bit of a mismatch, 17,000 cases in west africa, 11 in the u.s., and yet the public

discourse here in the u.s. in the days before your appointment, what have we learned about how difficult it is to communicate, to engage in public communication about risks like this? >> jack, it is understandable when people hear about something that is new and dangerous, that we've never experienced before, to react with trepidation. i think the best thing we can do in the face of that anxiety is promptly with an aggressive response, but one based on science, medicine, and the best possible learning we have about this. so i think our country was very lucky to have someone like tony fauci, a person who won the nations highest civil honor six years ago, and is still fighting this fight every day. to have his leadership and wisdom and voice has been a critical part of that.

i also think we simply, people had to experience our success in managing this disease to have confidence we could successfully manage this disease. the fact all eight of the patients with ebola who have been probably diagnosed have been treated successfully, all survived the experienced and are with their families now, has been a reassuring thing. something people could not know when they heard about it is that it had a 70% death rate. a combination of a great communication from experienced leaders, policies based on science and evidence and medicine, and proven success in isolating, identifying, and treating cases have been the key things in bringing the public anxiety down. >> anything you want to add? >> tony, as ron said, you have been at this for a while.

20 years you have been leading the institute. you will be remembered in our nation for the leadership you provided during the most difficult and challenging moment when we were confronting hiv aids, trying to sort that out as a nation. are there things you are bringing from those experiences, things you're bringing from those experience in the 1980's and 1990's, as you wrestled with the hiv-aids crisis, to this one? >> well there are several. , one that you alluded to is the idea of consistent, honest, open communication of what you know and what you don't know. don't ever be afraid of saying you do not know balanced against trying to seem like you are smart and you know when you don't and then your credibility goes down. the other thing is to try to communicate in a way that is

always science and evidence-based. you may not get it across the first time you say it, but you've got to say it over and over again. that is the issue of risk and probability. to try to explain to people that the risks of things are there. we've got to accept that. we had a lot of anxiety, as ron mentioned, understandable. you never put anxiety down. it is understandable. the way you counter that. the way we did with hiv in the 1980's is by scientific facts over and over again. i bring the analogy, because it is so striking. i have been involved in both, we are trying to communicate to the people that this virus is

transmitted by direct contact with bodily fluid, blood, feces, vomit, things people don't like to talk about, which is the reason why health care workers are the ones that are most at risk. they put themselves, they run into the fire, not away from the fire. that is why we have the risk translated into infection. that gets extrapolated by the american public when they see ebola. they think somehow everyone is at risk and you got to keep telling them the scientific facts. i remember so clearly being on ted koppel's "nightline" trying to explain to someone arguing against me that the risk -- this was 1982. they said, why don't we not allow gay waiters to wait on tables in greenwich village?

because we know a substantial portion of them are infected. what happens if they have a cut on their hand and put a plate down and you have a cut and you pick the plate up? people were actually focusing on that. you had to see the scientific evidence, is that possible? yes. do a probability curve. it is more likely that you will get hit by a car as you walk out of the restaurant than it is somebody who gave you hiv that way. and then finally, when all of the scientific data was in, people believed it. that is how you counter. you have got to be combed. never be pejorative of people who actually disagree with you. even though you think they are unreasonable. just keep countering it with scientific-based evidence. and it works. >> particularly here in

georgetown i think the key to , this response is a unique combination of science and faith. science, as tony indicated, being medically aware and having the best policies based on the best science and the kind of information tony talked about. but as with the hiv-aids crisis, the role of the faith community in preaching about compassion, tolerance, about volunteerism. about non-stigmatization, about service, that is part of the response. one of the first meetings i had at the white house was with faith leaders from all faith denominations that were sending people to volunteer to west africa. dr. kent brantly, who has become a face of recovering ebola cases in united states and has generously donated. he was there on a mission in west africa. sometimes in places like georgetown we wonder how the

faith and science go together, how do we reconcile these two things, and the ebola crisis is a crisis where we need both these things and address all elements of the response in moments of crisis. >> i think you both have captured a couple of important points. ron mentioning faith, identify the role that communities play in helping to control the spread, the arc of an illness. in the 1980's, many communities came together to complement, supplement, support the work that colleagues were doing in the science to create a more immersive context in which to respond to some of the dynamics of the illness. right now one of the organizations that has been on the front lines has been doctors without borders, and they seem

to borrow some of the efforts that you were describing with paul farmer's work of bringing a whole community into the work. could you talk more about your own experiences in trying to mobilize the power of communities in support of responding in moments like this? >> well, the thing that i have most experience obviously is in hiv, because it was so pervasive. we have had the anxiety of ebola, and we have had a handful of cases here. back then, we had tens of thousands of cases, and not a lot of people were paying attention to it early on. when you talk about community, i think the involved and caring community, mostly the activist community, have transformed the way we look at diseases now in the united states.

because we don't not have the need with ebola in the united states. but i can tell you the reason that we have had the success in southern africa with hiv is that the activist community in africa borrowed a page from the playbook of the activist community in the united states and said, there are drugs out there, they are making people well, we are dying, we need those drugs, and that is the reason why we had the evolution and president bush stepped to the plate and did what he did. i think now, if the communities in africa -- and i know they are very stressed because there is government dysfunction, civil war, a lot of things there that are dysfunctional -- but our community demands for the kinds of systems, the kind of infrastructure that we are talking about, i think, jack, that is going to go a long way in making that happen.

there is nothing like a community that gets together with one message to change the way leaders look. it happens right here in the united states with hiv and aids activist community. why not happen in africa about health care? >> let me ask two quick questions, and then we will open it up. first, on funding. roughly $2 billion has been committed to the international community. the united states has been responsible for a good quarter of that. the who has outlined an ambitious plan to bring this into control by generate. is the level of funding, roughly $2 billion that has been donated from nations around in the e.u., is that sufficient to respond to the crisis? >> no, it is not, and that is why we have been moving on a number of fronts, jack. we continue to solicit contributions of both people and

resources and funds all over the world and from all kinds of international organizations. i also think it is worth remembering there is also not tallied in that a fantastic response from nongovernmental organizations, foundations, nonprofits, generous actors in our country and around the world that are also part of it. but critically, president obama asked the congress to consider emergency funding request of $6.2 billion, $4.7 billion for immediate use, $1.5 billion for a contingency fund in case the disease changes in ways and goes into other countries. we are hoping in the next week if congress wraps up its omnibus spending bill that a large chunk of that funding will be passed. we need those funds urgently. the response of the u.s., with all the agencies doing

something, has been on borrowed money, reallocating resources, reallocating people. no one a year ago had ebola response in their budgets. we simply sent hundreds of civilians to west africa, thousands of service people. that has come by moving resources round. those resources are running out. the only way we can keep up the response let alone expanded is by getting this emergency funding request approved. >> tony, in your earlier comments, you mentioned the importance of a vaccine. my colleagues here will no doubt attest that i never allow an opportunity to go by where i do not make a pitch for increased funding for the nih. it works its way back to our

colleges and universities. [laughter] >> you're right, he never misses an opportunity. [laughter] >> but this disease was discovered in 1976, and we do not have a vaccine. can you tell a little bit about the background context. >> absolutely. we have been working on a vaccine since 1999, 2000, when i recruited the team from the vaccine research center. the first paper was in 2000. we were never able to get a serious pharmaceutical partner for the simple reason that they did not perceive it as something that would be a blockbuster. from 1976 until now, 24 outbreaks for a total, excluding the current outbreak, of about 2300 people. no one wanted to invest in that. i think that is one of the roles of the federal government.

people talk about the federal government, stay out of our way. this is one of the roles whether federal government took the ball and said we are going to stick with this, develop it, and finally when things started to percolate, then we got good pharmaceutical partners. but if we had not been involved in that, and, again, it is a lesson that if you really want to be prepared, one of the things that is so difficult, and i have been frustrated for a long time, it is very difficult to get money for something that has not happened. you know, when something happens, people say, what were you doing, why weren't you ready for it? but when you say, we need to be ready for a pandemic flu or what have you come it is, we have priorities, the budget is flat,

etc. the same thing with pharmaceutical companies. they want something that will be used right away. >> all kidding aside, the reality is that the level of funding for the national institutes of health was significantly impacted during the sequester, more than $1.5 billion was removed. we got $1 billion back in january, the new budget reconciliation, but we are still below 2012 levels, and that is not a trajectory for us as a nation if we are going to be able to respond to the kinds of challenges that we face. >> we're going to open this up now. there's a microphone in the center aisle. if you would like to ask a question to him if you could just get in line behind the microphone, and we will take as many as we can come in the next 20, 25 minutes or so. please introduce yourself. >> i'm a member of the faculty of the school of public policy.

one of the topics that was not discussed so far is the relationship between science and politics. and we have seen the difficulty in the u.s. system of dealing with one aspect of the political role, which is the structure of our system of federalism. and i wondered if you would comment on that, and also comment on some of the other lessons that you might draw on the relationship between science and politics. thank you. >> thank you. >> well, i think we do have a federal system, and in the popular press i inferred often as the ebola czar, and i never feel as un-czar-y as when we try to do with this complex patchwork of agencies involved. that said, our response in the united states it has incredibly benefited by the hard work of many state and local officials, so this is a two-way relationship. right now we have about 1400 people who have traveled from

west africa in the past 21 days, and we monitor them twice a day for their temperatures. that is done by state and local officials. local authorities take on network every day, and make a contribution to the effort. and obviously, as we have rolled out our system of ebola treatment centers, as we just announced earlier this week, 35 hospitals, 53 beds, those are set by federal standards, but by state and locals, designating, reviewing, and approving the hospitals ready for that. i think the federal system has worked for us for 225 years, and i think has some days frustration, but many days great benefits to us. science i think has been the centerpiece of our response in the administration. it has been the guidepost for us. i think by and large that has been successful. i think that, as tony said,

translating the scientific ideas into a public discussion is always tricky. we have been very lucky. i want to repeat myself. we're lucky to have somebody like tony to help explain the bridge between science and popular discussion, and we just need to keep on that dialogue, and i think that dialogue can be successful. >> one thing, jack, though, we should be careful to not always equate politics as a dirty word. we live in a political system, but the political system really works a lot sometimes. you know, politics is politics, but it does work. it does work. >> please introduce yourself. >> hi, i'm a senior in college here. this is for dr. fauci. it is an honor district you from my high school.

we have a couple of fellows in the audience here. my question has to do with ebola and something that we have learned in one of our classes at georgetown. in my biology seminar we learned about neglected tropical diseases. one of the topics that came up was if ebola could be considered a neglected tropical disease, and it is a point of debate because it has certain qualities of a neglected tropical disease, but it is missing a few key ones. i'm wondering what your opinion was on this to become whether or not you would consider it a neglected tropical disease. >> the answer is certainly, by broader criteria, it is the tropical disease that is neglected because we do not have the tools right now that we wished we did have. neglected tropical diseases are given different come as you know, because you are studying it, different definitions phone into a different category. i look at it much more loosely.

i would consider this as something that now it is going [no audio] >> we're having some problems

with this program. we will get you back to the program as soon as we can. [no audio]

once we now return to our program in progress. >> i was wondering if you could speak of the case of tom's eric duncan on whether his life could have been saved on non-. >> you cannot make those kinds .f predictions how then taking care of so many thousands of patients in my life, to say we could have saved his life, the man was sick. he went to an emergency room. he was not immediately diagnosed. it is tough to be pejorative

about that. it is easy for somebody in an easy chair here to say, well, you know, an african man comes in, he says he feels sick, you are in the middle of an ebola epidemic. emergency rooms are very busy places. it was unfortunate he was not diagnosed early. he got in, and when he got into the hospital, he was really very ill. had he been plugged into an intensive care unit earlier, it might've been possible. we should try to look at lessons learned from that. so i do not think we could definitively say that things would have been different, though it is possible it could have been. >> thank you. >> thank you but for coming to speak to us today. i'm a senior in the school foreign service. you touched on briefly the role of msf in the ebola outbreak. i was wondering if you could give thoughts on white or such a discrepancy between msf response in calling this the outbreak of president in march, and who's waiting until august to declare

an emergency. could you talk about why we saw this? thank you. >> that is a tough question, because i have always been known and still am a straight shooter. i think if you look at who, who has suffered from chronic underfunding, and one would have hoped that they would have recognized very early on that this was something that really was going to explode. they did not have the manpower. they had been hampered by budgetary constraints. they have had substantial cuts in their experienced personnel. so what msf, which is a fantastic organization, they are there, they are on the ground,

they see it as it is happening and as it is unfolding, and they called it correctly very early on. i believe if the who had had the strength that they should have had at the time, that they probably would have been much more intensively involved there on the ground. >> hi. a pleasure to speak to you today. i'm a sophomore in the school foreign service. as a student of anthropology, i've been taking careful note of how the media has been reacting to the ebola crisis. and so i was just wondering why you both thought the media is a big part of the problem, at least on the ground, and we have been seeing this high level of anxiety. why has there been such extreme levels of stigmatization? in new jersey we had an issue with -- a lot of issues, but two schoolchildren from rwanda who were almost kicked out of school. there was a schoolteacher in kentucky who had visited africa and was almost forced to resign. why is the ebola crisis

triggering such high levels of anxiety? is it a marker of racial tensions? is it something else going on? what do you guys think? >> i'm not an anthropologist, and so what i would say is i cannot really explain why the direction of ebola has been what it has been in america. what i can say is what we've been trying to address that. and so we have been working very hard to make sure that those who are involved in treating the disease, both overseas and her at home, are not subjected and their families are not subjected to stigmatization or ostracism, anything like that, but are celebrated for what they are, which is heroes. i think part of this is just a need to do more educating, more informing about the low-level risks that are involved here and getting to be more aware with that. we've seen this for health care workers in america. people at bellevue who treated dr. spencer reported that many of them and their families were

having negative reactions. it is an important thing for all of us to do, to speak out against that time of stigmatization. those people, the people who are volunteering, the people at msf, paul farmer's group, those are the people who are keeping us safe here. they are doing great humanitarian work. they are saving lives. but if nothing else, we should think of them as the people who are keeping us safe here and welcome them home with the kind of welcome they deserve to be given when the come back from that. >> one of the things that i have learned that was tough for me to accept, but after you see it a lot, is a raw emotion that sometimes gets people who

otherwise would be considered as good people to do things that are not so good. and i saw it in spain in the hiv-aids epidemic. now, obviously, there are shades of racism and other things that might be going on, but i do not think that is the predominant motivating force. it gets to what i was trying to explain before about the issue of how the public perceives risks. we go through risks every day of our lives, but the risks are chronic and you accept them. for one reason or other, which anthropologists, budding anthropologists like yourself,

probably no better than i, that when there is a new risk, even if the risk in a probability prioritization is much lower than the risks that you are already accepting on an everyday basis, for strange reasons, you react much more violently in your mind metaphorically against that risk because you do not like a new risk, even though you are already living many, many risks. so the one that was very committed, very clear, there were many, but back in the aids days, when children of an aids patient or ryan white, who was a young man who was a hemophiliac who got hiv, they tried to burn down his house. they would not let him into school because the fear of this unknown disease, even though the risk was much less than any of the children who did not want to go to school with him, probability and risk. the probability of their getting hiv from ryan was infinitely

less than them getting hit by a car going to school. yes, they would not let ryan white into the school. so fear does really does strange things to people. that is something that is deep-seated in our nature, and is part of us, unfortunately. >> hi. i am a history major in the college, but also a biology minor. i was wondering whether this crisis, which has been such a nexus of the science and political systems in the united states, do you think the ebola crisis or a similar crisis would create the political and economic wealth to fund research into these neglected diseases, whether they are tropical diseases or not, and really make that a national priority that is bipartisan? how would that go?

what methods would we need to create to ensure that these are priorities, and how would we go about that? >> well, i think it already has. i think when you look at the progress we have made, hopefully on a bipartisan basis in getting the president's emergency refunding requested from congress, and a lot of money is going to good nih, and other parts of hhs and to this global health response, which will be investments in dealing with our immediate crisis. that is why they are an emergency. but also making investments in more long-term approaches as well. i think it is important. the president was at nih on tuesday, and the point he made there, which tony and i were talking about on the way, was how this crisis shows the importance of basic science and investments in basic science. if you decide the day after ebola first appears on the front

page of "the new york times" that it is time to do the basic research to build a vaccine to treat ebola, you're 10 years too late. so a lot of this response shines a spotlight on the need to be making these basic investments well in advance of the crises so that we can do with these crises as they arise. and to see something like dr. anthony sullivan at nih whom i have met twice who has been working on this for 15 years and for the first 14 years of that was one of the most obscure people in science and in the past year is now one of the most prominent people just shows you how long this takes and how much, how important basic sciences to dealing with crises like this when they arise. >> we're coming close to the end. if you could answer questions, each of you, and then we will try to see if we can give a

response to them all. if you could be quick in articulating yours, that would be great. >> i am a senior in the school of foreign service. what specifically -- what has the medical community, what has the washington community done -- what has been learned specifically from this crisis looking forward in terms of identifying the next risk or how to respond to the next risk? >> ok, next. >> hi. i wanted to about more about the relationship between underdevelopment, poverty, in the medical infrastructure in this country, but what is being done and what could be done to actually have a sustainable approach to ebola, addressing lack of capacity of the states? >> last question. >> hi, i'm a student in the advocacy program. my question is how ebola will act as a precedent on the global health platform and how it is

basically going to set the stage for how people are going to react to potential outbreaks in the future? thank you. >> so we have lessons learned, capacity -- >> you are prescient because all the three questions are linked -- what have we learned, what about the global approach -- it relates a lot of what ron and i have both been saying about it is dramatic is crises like we are going through now which underscore what people have been saying for some time of building not only the kind of health care infrastructure, global health security agenda, infrastructure, not only from a health standpoint, but from a research standpoint. investment in research that will not have us to play catch-up on

the time and the investment in a health infrastructure that not only will detect these diseases earlier, that will allow us to respond early. and that is really what a lot of the global health agenda is all about. >> well, i really cannot add much to that other than to say it is a sad fact what a large role poverty plays in the fatality rate from ebola. i think when this crisis started, everyone read in the newspaper that ebola kills 70% of its victims. well, that is true without treatment and without interventions. even in west africa, some of the ngo's treating people with nothing more complicated than rehydration are bringing down

fatality rates 35%. when you think about you can cut the death rate of a disease in half like giving someone the most basic kind of health care, it just shows you how important what a role resources and building up these health care systems and helping these underdeveloped countries get to a basic level of care, what a huge difference that can make, if you can cut the death rate from ebola in half by giving people i.v.'s. not what tony had been doing when he was treating nina pham, but just very basic care, that is a telling fact, a telling anecdote about this. so certainly, we need to make the investments in getting our health care system. the united states ready to deal with infectious disease, and we have to invest in countries around the world in getting that global health infrastructure in place and trying to address

these long-term development issues as well. >> one last question. classes are ending this week. you go into exams next week. we are then going to be off for a little while. we will be back in about a month. advice for us as a university community? are there things that university like georgetown could do to contribute to the response to this challenge, this really urgent challenge that is particularly facing west africa, but raises a number of important questions beyond that require our attention? any advice for us as a university community? >> well, i would not recommend you all go and try to take care of patients, but i think to develop as part of the experience in global health a solidarity with young people of these countries to get them tried to realize that the young people here care about them, and you can do that through various organizations, volunteering, or doing it just by communications. it meant an awful lot to the people in southern africa when we reached out to them in the aids epidemic without even going

over there, but encouraging them in their fight against aids and the pressure that they would put on their own governments, particularly in south africa when the government refused to allow drugs to be distributed because they did not believe hiv caused aids. >> i would add to that. i think that, one, it is great all the different schools at georgetown where this is an appropriate discipline to study what happened in this case, domestically and overseas, and learn. you cannot learn from crazies like this if you do not study

them, if you do not learn about them, and if you do not have the academic work that communicates that and disseminates that. that is an important project. i think that being voices for dealing with some of these stigmatization, ostracization issues, are things that students and faculty in the georgetown community and do both here at home and overseas, and is important for georgetown as a global university to make sure it is engaged people from these three nations. you had someone here talk about her experience in sierra leone and have that experience, and be a bridge between our community at georgetown and those communities is an important part of that. more of that interchange will make us a better community in georgetown and make this response in the future a more effective response. >> i want to thank you both for being here with us today. this is been an ordinary moment for our community have a chance to be in conversation with you

both. we are grateful to you for the leadership in providing our nation and our globe at this important moment. and it is a real privilege that we could have you with us. ladies and gentlemen, will you please join me in expressing our gratitude? >> thank you, jack. [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]

>> a discussion on the united state's policing task force. continues. host: joining us is richard beary, president of the international association of chiefs of police. he previously served for many years as a police chief. chief of police for lake mary, florida. started with the police department. is there a disconnect between the public and police today? guest: it depends on the community. we see some parts of the country that have incredible long-term community relations between law

enforcement and the public in some areas that don't. we try to cast it with a broad net. it is difficult. is there room for improvement? absolutely. there are a lot of communities that have those good relationships and need to continue working on this in advance and forge ahead. host: what is one of those communities? why are they successful? some are in pilot programs for community oriented policing services. there are so many large and small community's across the that have been doing a great job with community policing for many years. unfortunately, in this law enforcement world, sometimes one or two major incidents tend to and everybody thinks that is the way it is across the country. each individual community needs to look at what their goal is from their law enforcement agency and help guide that. host: when you talk about

community policing, what does that entail? guest: it's a philosophy that has to be adopted i law enforcement agency and by the government the agency works for. if it does not support the community function, they are not going to have the funding they need to do those jobs. what happened over the last 10 years is we have seen budget .hrinks - law enforcement has gotten into this call to call. when those things happen, here we are today. the other thing that happens -- a commitment of the city council and county government, whichever type of organization is in place

, the first thing that gets cut when budget funds become scarce is training. train, train, train. i absolutely agree. sometimes, the perception is training is fluff money and is the first thing that gets cut. it's a dangerous situation to cut training for law enforcement. host: should cops want to be outside of their cars? guest: in a perfect world, absolutely. andends to get guided steered by scientific studies. there was some studies that showed we could reduce the cost and respond better if we put them in cars. law enforcement listened and we did that. here we are 40 years later rethinking that position. it costs money. , videotape ofary

ner, when you see those videos, what is your visceral reaction? guest: anytime someone loses their life, that is the first thing that jumped out at you. it does not matter how long you have been in this business. it has an effect on you and you don't want to see it. rightare a lot of issues now about videotaping. i support videotaping. 98% of the time, cops do a great job of doing the job they do under difficult circumstances. i support these videos. the challenge with video is it is after-the-fact. we will have a nice record of it. how about we train in advance and give the skills and tools and equipment they need to keep from getting to that bad situation? there is a balance. we need to focus on providing those things cops need.

host: let's get our viewers involved. richard beary is our guest. sean is calling in from lakeland, florida. near your home area. caller: the morning to you. -- good morning to you. is, the system itself, in my opinion, is broken. people have no trust in the system. it's about perception. a caller said people don't perceive things in a certain way. you have your point of view with how you look at things. the thing nobody looks at is why are people having these interactions with police? police people in the community where everything is good, people

have jobs. that is the real problem here. this guy got killed because he was trying to get money. nobody wants to be a criminal. you have an extent of people who love crime or get the thrill. point, everybody involved in these crimes are trying to get money. if these people had jobs or felt like they could go out and work and make $40,000 a year and not have to worry about scratching and grinding to find something to eat, they would not have to go out and sell loose cigarettes to make extra money. host: sean in lakeland, florida. chief beary? guest: i appreciate those comments. all of the focus tends to be a law enforcement. law enforcement is just one piece of the system.

on behalf of the international association of chief of police, we have been asking for many years to do a complete overview of the criminal justice system. there are a lot of other family services and pieces of the system that need to be addressed. economy,t is about the about jobs, about opportunity. the law enforcement officer is the most visible form of government. we tend to be the one to draw the attention. it's a systemwide problem and i agree with those comments. mentioned the perception issue. this summer, a study came out usa today. think police departments don't do a good job in holding officers accountable 2-1. guest: that is locale to locale.

one thing about local government and local law enforcement, that agency works for the community. i have been on several panels and i say this. if you are unhappy with the police service you have, you have a government that hires and fires the chief of police. if you don't like the service they give, get another chief. when you are a local police chief, twice a month, you are up to be hired or fired. if you don't like it, change it. i firmly believe that. host: from brenda in tallahassee. see a sheriffer i , i stop and say thank you for your service. i appreciate you. everybody should do that. they are feeling so unappreciated right now. i hear a lot of black people saying the problem is there is

not enough black cops. there are too many white cops and not enough like cops. not enough black cops. why don't they put the black cops in the black areas and put the white cops in the white areas? try --well, we always your demographics should be representative of your community. that is a lofty goal. people through the hiring process is not as easy as we hope for. hirehought of trying to and recruiting in the demographics in your location is a goal that every agency should aspire to. we do believe that. thank you for the thank you part.

deputy both young sheriffs and it's a difficult time for them. they go out there every day and do their job. they made a choice to come to law-enforcement to make a difference. a thank you every now and then goes a long way. host: is there a disconnect on the racial lines between african-americans and police? guest: in some areas, yes. cast the bigto net, but in some areas, there are. the men and women of law enforcement come in a variety of different colors and shapes engenders. .- and genders the more we can be representative of archimedes, the better we will be. , the our communities better we will be. part of the challenge is with the negativity towards police,

if you were a 21-year-old, whether you want to get into law enforcement -- will you want to get into law enforcement? the public has to help us. help us bring this people in. i'm not sure if i was a 22-year-old college graduate be a police want to officer for $40,000 year with the negativity we get. host: independent line. caller: good morning. the first caller made an important point. we have a terrorism plan here in new york called see something say something. if i see something, i'm not calling the cops so they can come to the scene and jump out of cars with guns drawn and shoot the first round person they see. see.rst round person they

when the judges says can anybody not serve in good conscience, i will stand up and put both hands in the air. don't come here as tourists or bring your tourist dollars here. host: barbara, have you always recents opinion or is it events? she's gone, sorry about that. see something, say something, and don't come because we are a violent nation. also well, it is interesting, i have been in law enforcement 37 years and our changed dramatically over those 37 years which is one reason our association wanted to this commission going 20 years ago. not i started we were responsible for terrorism, now we are terrorism and hazmat and crime experts and mental health expertsment we are supposed to be experts in a lot

thingsed a somewhere in there is law enforcement. unfortunately those messages get blurred. but see something, say something does work. issue.a perception but quite frankly back to what we are talking about without the trust an calls we cannot -- and calls we cannot be effective. time for a difficult law enforcement because the challenges we face and we have just es don't meet the staff levels we have. tip city, ohio. democrat. aller: when it comes to prosecuting or investigating jury officers, the grand system doesn't work. i know prosecutors like it they can control it, but that is the problem. police officers that

dealt with that guy, how many their belt?on was there an alternative to choking him? and as far as money for police officers, take all that military , cashent they are getting in and put it in training programs. a couple will look at of those things. the grand jury system when you are in law enforcement you off the bat you don't make the laws, you just enforce them. a different want system those are legislative issues. we deal within the framework that is established for us. i don't know if they had tasers there. i can't answer that question. usewe certainly endorse the leth -- anyny unanimous non leth onlethal thing we use but

sometimes bad things happen with them because of health conditions. astly, the military decision piece, in the meeting with president obama the other day we and 96% of cussion the military equipment that goes to law enforcement has nothing with m-raps and bearcats. supplies em are radio and things that keep them running. but there are positives that ome out of the things we learn from the military and one of my roll out year is trauma kits. we save lives using trauma kits a military issue piece of equipment and we are saving victims, traffic crash victims. we tend to be leaders in trying and do good things for the community and sometimes unfortunately bad things happen. we will continue to do the jobs we are sworn to do. chief beary, do local

police departments need those tanks or the automatic weapons that some police received?s have guest: let's start with the weapons. very the things that i'm familiar with is the threat of active shooters. experience at the university of central florida we had a situation with a shooter campus. at florida state university a couple of weeks ago they had a situation. with the situation in america with gun violence unfortunately the law officers need those weapons to be able to address that threat. imagine what only a community would say if five to eight, 10 -- you pick the number of people died because the officers didn't have the weapons they needed to stop that situation. then we would be criticized with knowing the equipment you need and it is available how could not have that available. there is a fine line. heavy military equipment,

i think that again goes back to local government. if the government entity, if the mayor and city commission think a need they should probably have it. i watched the situation unfold first thing i he noticed is the armor ed vehicle to try to get the hostages out. there is a difference between an vehicle with a weapon and arm armored vehicle that doesn't have a weapon on it to get out same and insert the officers to stop the threat. act. a balancing but i throw it right back to local government. you get what you accept. if you want changes and really the majority of law enforcement the united states is done on a local level. voice.volved and have a host: you mentioned meeting with serve on the you 21st century policing task force up. president set

haughton, hn from louisiana, republican line. in a parish which is a county to most people and the a good point, n the involvement of what i call the ballot box. ferguson it was something like 7% of the blacks voted. vote for.at you i'm glad i live in a parish because unlike a police chief we vote on our sheriff and we have been very fortunate in last 30-some years we have sheriffs.three if they don't do a good job we vote them out. been watching the video of the incident with the black lucies.ing the he would like to see that from the very, very start. borro because i seriously doubt if all hose police officers showed up

exactly at one time and started as i ebody called in understand and officers responded and it seems like here are three officers in there dressed differently than all the rest. is like nds like it walking into the movie in the iddle and i would like to see the video from when the ndividuals on the street violating the law and the police officers didn't write the law, in the e legislature state of new york wrote that law. force, want a police whether municipal or sheriff's department deciding, well, going tot a law we are enforce. i want them to enforce the laws on the books. like the law on the book i will get involved with my it off the and get books. guest: i think that john is money.n the you get what you get. if you don't get involved in the process, then you are

going to have to accept the style of law enforcement that is you. to so, i think those are very accurate. withther interesting thing video we deal with this. limited air time media stations have they will show 15 that is f a situation 20 minutes. as a police chief you have to offset that and explain how those things happen. but it is a communication piece, too, and not being afraid to get on there and put it out there say here is the whole story. host: can you share an experience you had while serving where you had to pull your weapon and felt threatened, et cetera? actually numerous times. anything from armed robbers, burglars, there are high risk situations every ay that law enforcement responds to. the other thing worth noting when you think of the millions

contacts that happen every law enforcement officers and citizens the use of low whether very you consider the entire picture. i think that needs to be pointed out. those cases again that we've seen in the last several months draw the headlines. the vast majority of law nforcement and citizens contacts result in no use of force. host: i'm sure you have hard the phrase driving while black. harris called in from michigan going he would be stopped home from his job at 1:00 or :00 in the morning simply in his view because he was black. something rfplt police officers discuss? >> as agency heads yes, we do. states it and other is mandatory training we call legal traffic stops because we believe and i certainly believe that there

based solely tops on any race, gender or other situations. so, one of the things we see sometimes is people assume they because you become it, because i'm black, i'm young. no, you didn't ave your seat belt on, you are speeding. but racial profiling as far as i'm concerned and most law is ement executives unacceptable. that is plain and simple the way it has to be. host: richard beary is president he interal association of chiefs of police. danielle is on the line. make a commentto the swaeuituation -- i understd you were saying about the video that other gentleman the clothingard to

of the officers. but even if this gentleman was those cigarettes, how to the y are not going tores where they sell the cigarett cigarettes? guest: well, again, i was not there. i don't run the new york city department. unfortunately sometimes law enforcement -- we don't pick the want. we when we get told this is a problem and we need to address obligated to go out this and address it. aain i don't know if that was planned mission or how that went about. ometimes enforcing law is challenging because policy makers decide what our we rities need to be and have a duty and obligation to respond. a t: chief, this is maybe little out of your bailiwick but e read an editorial earlier this morning that the prosecutors and police are too cozy. it is too

that the grand jury system maybe needs to be opened up. those have thoughts on issues? guest: well, about the coziness most prosecutors i dealt with continued to stay at arm's length. a separate world. we send them the cases, they look at the cases and make charging decisions. of them are highly educated, all attorneys. nd what i have seen them to be is very conservative in looking at the facts and making sure hey have a good case before they go forward. that is a generalization. jury system has been around a long time that. will be a state legislature to change. the question is really do people feel like the system is being and that is the underlying question. that might be the law enforcement, we have a part of that and some of the prosecutors open and put it

out there. i think that will help solve some problems. change the to legislature procedure that has to be done through the state legislature. host: tim is a police officer in virginia., chantilly, you are on with richard beary. caller: good morning, chief. you referenced the young fficers not wanting to come on and become a police officer. i continued to disagree with that. the public s that has this perception of how it is because olice officer f the fact that chiefs on down don't hold police officers accountable. i agree that we as law officers do a great job, the majority of us. may be 1% or 2% that don't get held accountable for that is like the one rotten apple spoils the whole

bunch. to ar as like it is amazing gets everything kind of amped down when it comes to excessive use of force because a lot of officers are not properly held d and not being accountable. i will be watching the news and cop who shot a baby with a pacifier that he thought was a 1-year-old. that is just things on the news. t is not a black and white iss issue. but the bottom line is these officers some of them should be fired. that is in the blue uniform does not necessarily warrant being in the uniform they don't have the mentality, the maturity level or the professionalism it takes to a police officer. host: thank you, sir. agree.well, i absolutely in any occupation there are

people that do great jobs and some that don't measure up. i agree with the accountability. i absolutely agree that those that don't do the job should be gone. that becomes as a law nforcement executive very challenging with labor unions and court decisions out there. but if you don't measure up you gone and we should hold people accountable. is a member ofry the president's 21st century task force, the c task force is t philadelphia police officer and police officer charles ramsey. what is your primary goal with -- this task force to the to present president actionable recommendations as to how we can