be a journalist. you can go to journalism school if you want. you don't have to know anything special. you can go to a town hall and ask a question. you know as much or more than the elected official you're asking. ofarrassed the heck out somebody. in many cases that's a positive thing. >> just briefly, i think that much can be done through the suggestions already made it, but bear in mind, this thing called differentrty has many positions on different issues, different strands of it. you can't just get by thinking that if people inform themselves, called themselves tea party, that we are going to solve many of the problems. if you party people themselves disagree. take foreign affairs. you have the isolationist he party and the internationalist -- internationalist departing strand.

we should not dissolution ourselves. illusion thatthe just because tiki party exists, that the problems are going to be solved. they're going to have to solve some of the problems themselves, amongst themselves, about what actually they stand for. that is why i think your initial question -- there is a lot of agreement on the things that are wrong, but the direction we should go remains open within the tea party itself. >> it was a good question, because i read it in something that you read. [applause] we will take questions from the audience. the answered everything. gentleman over here. disagree with the notion that the conservative movement and the tea party are one and the same. because i have been

involved in the conservative movement since 1976 when i became a volunteer for the reagan campaign. the big difference that i see is that the goldwater activists that i got to know and the activists from the reagan iran the conservative activists, were very sharp political operators. and they knew that they were in the fight for the long haul, many of them. a lot of them had been around for years and years, participating in the fight. when i became involved in the tea party movement, i think that a lot of people that i would have to classify as naive. and i think that some of the reason why the large tea party participation has dropped off since the early days is that when we did not achieve -- with the tea party did not achieve their ultimate goals right away, i think a lot of people became discouraged and left the tea party movement. i do not think there is much

argument that it is as vibrant as it was when it started. i would just like to hear your comments about that. i guess i disagree with the premise. i think that -- look, there is not an obamacare vote as to whether or not nancy pelosi gets to randy bill through congress coming up in the way that there was in august of 2009 when people had that live fire drill to push at. i think that the notion that you would have a huge, six-month long fight over the export/import bank, this distillation of cronyism in washington, d.c., has put energy in the grassroots to pay attention to what is going on in washington, to sweat the details and be organized. partiesa lot of the tea have become involved in, heritage action or other great groups. is not obamacare hanging out there, there is not part hanging out there in terms of huge boats but when you look

back in 2011 to the debt limit in the amount of energy that was look at theou interview last year on stuff like a farm bill or the export, import bank, there are millions of people that are actively informed. i think, look at what is going on with immigration right now. i certainly think that if you have an obamacare going forward right now, you would see people through august getting engaged in the same way they were last year around the defund effort. and two years before that, right after obamacare past. so i guess i disagree with the premise that they are not as actively involved. i found the activist to be some of the most well-informed, thoughtful people involved in politics that i run across. we had a friend or people in atlanta from around the country that were part of the sentinel program, some of the most interesting, thoughtful, well-informed people out there. current political consultants in washington, d.c., and if you do more is a feature than a bug. >> i think i am in the middle of

you two. when you have a movement like the tea party, i agree it is a movement for the reasons that jim suggests, it has all the hallmarks of arab -- of a movement or it when you have that kind of a movement, it attracts people that have -- that are excited at the beginning and have not been involved. with the tea party, a lot of people -- the number of times i interviewed somebody, at a tea party rally or a clinical event or a primary debate or something, who said to me, i have never been involved in politics before. well, ok, that is fair. they are necessarily not going to have the level of sophistication of some of the people you are talking about who got involved in goldwater and state involved forever. so there is a learning curve, to use the cliche. i think the tea party is going through that right now. certainly you expect the white-hot energy at the very beginning to fade a little bit.

you would expect that some of the people who became active who were not political animals before that to get the bug, to really become active in to stay active and maybe become, in 20 years, you, sitting there and asking a question of another panel. at the same time, you would expect that some of the people that never really were political animals in the first place, that never were junkies or into these issues, to be into them for a short time and then go -- grow disillusioned, maybe with the tea party movement or with the fact that you can't have instant results in our kind of messy republic. so i think there is a position in between were both of you are. >> there is a question in the front. >> thanks. caesar, he said that polarization is in some ways, good. which is to say that he can move

issues to the front that otherwise would not be popularly debated. -- given that polarization cannot last forever, what are the other immediate benefits to having this kind of fast opposition that brings up the issue that otherwise would never have been discussed? sometimes, government doesn't get anything done, but sometimes it is better not to do anything. there is no way of answering your question in the abstract other than to say that the american system as it is laid out allows for something like tension, even polarization. but it is not polarization so much as this question of paralysis of our institutions. which has been at issue. paralysis has meant, up until 2014, where the majority looks like it has changed, perl it --

paralysis meant not going along with what the democrats want. because they claimed that they were the majority party by virtue of winning the presidency and the senate. and the one that was paralyzing was in the house, which is the most popular body was still only one in three decision-making bodies. therefore it was delegitimized. questionay that the is, for what purpose was a delegitimized? and what ends are goals were served by this question mark -- this? beginning with health care issues, will obamacare survive? look, after 2012, maybe after 2016, this will likely have changed radically and when we look back on history, it will completely different. the winning side will not be beside the people thought was going to be the winning side, and by people here i mean most of the media and the intelligentsia. and who will be the winner? i remember the exchanges about

ronald reagan, who was regarded as an outright extremist, i -- off the charts. now when we look back, and not many of the younger people in the audience can represent, click it was look like in 1980, but look fact, to look at reagan's period in office is one that did a lot of good. looking back, they say that it was good that people resisted kind. as users of history came to the outcomes to my credit, sometimes, those were obstinate. that is what i meant by putting obstinacy or persistence as a virtue. is a virtue. not an exclusive virtue. time. credit for that. it's obstinacy which has led to tactical blunders put obstinacy all along professors is this becomend the paper has

themes victorious cause -- world has turned and resisted becomes victorious cause. if you look for the creative energy in washington is coming from, it is the list of people that steve mentioned at the start. marco rubio, ted cruz. those are the people that are showing a real policy innovation. it will take time. having the senate allows you to do more to advance the policy agenda, having the presidency would help. we should not be surprised to see a lot of things coming out of the tea party. at the same time, we are seeing more positive ideas coming from the tea party than from 30 urine companies. >> quickly, to pick up on something that you said -- 30 year incumbent's. >> quickly, to pick up on something that you said, i think that the president still think that he is in the majority.

that he speaks for the people that did not vote and that gives them legitimacy. if obstinacy is a virtue, he is obstinate. >> as mike said, it is true that that is where the real vibrancy and the conservative movement comes from in washington. the republican idea machine. from the tea party or at least tea party friendly elected officials and think tanks and what have you. one other point, just to provide an example of how far this remembers gone, you back in the lead up to the 2010 midterms. national republican congressional committee was advising its candidates against embracing anything like paul ryan's entitlement reforms. sending out memos, alerts, you cannot talk about this or touch this area and and that was the conventional wisdom. that was the cliche. medicare, third rail grid social

security, third rail. we have no had the discussion, but those kinds of reforms are in -- not only had to discussion, but those kind of reforms are in budget year after year after year. those who ran against, the demagogue them in and it's have survived. not only survived, in some cases, better. the last month of the marco rubio senate campaign against kendrick meek and truly crist was essentially a debate about social security reform. and charlie crist did at after ad after ad. rubio is the way your social security. he said, no i am not, and he explained his position. not all of that is because of the tea party but a lot of that is the tea party because of the focus on that, the recognition and awareness of the tea party helped raise, of these issues. of the fact that we are $18 billion in debt right now. -- $18 trillion in debt right

now. the left understands that better than the right. pelosi passing cap and trade knowing that it has zero chance in the senate because you train your members to talk about it. you have members going on for their district and defend the voting record. the last hundred -- left understands the bayou of legislating, even if it does not get on the next day, far better than the establishment right does. >> one last question from this gentleman right here. interaction, communication, coalitions have been built with the tea party and those across the political spectrum? because i have been a some events that are not conservative and the tea party has been brought at -- at some events that are not conservative in the tea party has been brought up and it has been negative or a mystery. there are ideas that are brought forth, saying that they think

that this might appeal to the wasparty but then it mentioned that we are not the right vehicle to approach them or talk to them. how just wondering, political, much or are they willing to work with others to get things done? think there is a ton of collaboration inside washington. individual --the i was in pennsylvania two weeks ago and the tea party, diverse groups of people of all ages, skin colors, everything that you hear does not exist in the tea party, coming up with innovative ideas. they just started a robo call the night before, the tea party group, to make sure they're reaching out to every group. i think there is a lot of collaboration. each tea party that exist in different communities is in many ways, the spirit of federalism. i do not think that it is this nationalized thing.

we make a huge effort at heritage action to make sure that people see us coming alongside them, not trying to tell them what to do. if we cannot win the argument with a tea party leader, the summing that we care about is worth caring about -- about, we may be wrong. i do not think there is a national congealing but there is a sense of cooperation and how can we get to the end zone together? i'm not sure -- did that answer the question? actually beenave at some progressive or liberal events. i think they did bring up things that it seems to me would appeal to the tea party. i am just curious if there is been that kind of interaction. >> in terms of policy ideas? look at a lot of over criminalization. very good votes on capitol hill and across the country. opportunities for collaboration on issues like that. rand paul has been fantastic at the over criminal is asian issues and what we can do to

unite right and left on that. >> while, please join me in thanking the panelists. [applause] program, iyed this would remind you that you can view the previous three online on reagan, goldwater, the contract with america. thank you. >> next, president obama announcing his choice for the next secretary of defense and meeting with king abdullah the second of jordan. and then a forum on the u.s. and global responses to ebola.

after that, a discussion on the policing task force. >> tomorrow, a memorial service will be held for former mayor marion being -- marion barry at the washington conventional -- convention center. speakers include national urban league share of mark morreale. my coverage of the service begins at 11:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. >> here are some of the programs you find a speaking on the c-span network. saturday at 11:00 eastern, live coverage of the memorial service for former mayor marion barry. sunday evening at 8:00 on the c-span cna -- c-span about this "q&a," a former abc white house correspondent. saturday night at 10:00 on book jason's localwo, on how the northeast united

states was not always the haven of racial equality and supportive of effort american civil rights. and sunday at new and, the live three-hour conversation with author and american enterprise institute president arthur brooks. with your phone calls, e-mails, and tweets. and on american history tv on 8:00, three, right at university of michigan professor martha jones on female slaves and the law. and sunday at 8:00, on the presidency. resident george h.w. bush's former secretary of state james baker on the phone with the berlin wall and the liberation of eastern europe. find the complete schedule on c-span that working with us know what you think about the programs you are watching. or send us ail us, tweet. conversation. like us on facebook, follow us >> was that obama has

nominated former deputy defense secretary ashton carter as his neck secretary of defense. he made the announcement from the roosevelt room of the west wing. --confirmed, he will succeed secede -- succeed chuck hagel. >> good morning, everybody. please have a seat. it is wonderful to be able to announce not the creation, but at least the filling of one new job. but before we do, i wanted to -- [laughter] make a somewhat broader statement about the economy. and ash is willing to indulge me. last month, america's businesses

created more than 300,000 jobs. this keeps a pace so far this year that we have not seen since the 1990s. so far this year, over the first 11 months of 2014, our economy has created 2.65 million jobs. that's more than in any entire year since the 1990s. our businesses have now created 10.9 million jobs over the past 57 months in a row. and that's the longest streak of private sector job growth on record. we also know that the pickup in the pace of job growth this year has been in industries with higher wages. and overall, wages are rising -- a very welcome sign for millions of americans. so we've got 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 support faster job growth in high-paying jobs. that means exports, infrastructure, streamlining our tax code, immigration reform, giving minimum wage workers a raise. it's been a long road to recovery from the worst economic crisis in generations, and we still have a lot more work to do to make sure that hardworking americans' wages are growing faster. but the united states continues to outpace most of the world. over the last four years, we've put more people back to work than europe, japan, and all other industrialized advanced countries combined. and we're 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. but it's worth us every once in a while reflecting on the fact

that the american economy is making real progress. and if we can continue in this trajectory, if we can continue to grow robustly, and if we make sure that those companies who are seeing profits -- they're probably higher than any time in the last 60 years -- that they're also making sure that their workers are sharing in that growth, then we can get a virtuous cycle that's really going to make a difference and be 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 that i announce cabinet positions on fake twitter accounts. (laughter) this is not the case. [laughter] a year ago, when ash carter completed his tenure as deputy

secretary of defense, secretary hagel took to the podium in ash's farewell ceremony and looked out at the audience of our civilian and military leaders, and he said, "i've known ash carter for many years. all of us here today have benefited from ash's hard work, his friendship, from his inspiration, and from his leadership." and chuck then went on to express his gratitude to his partner for "what ash has done for this country and will continue to do in many ways." couldn't have said it better myself. today, i'm pleased to announce my nominee to be our next secretary of defense, mr. ash carter. now, with a record of service that has spanned more than 30 years -- as a public servant, as an advisor, as a scholar -- ash is rightly regarded as one of our nation's foremost 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

situation room; he was by my side navigating complex security challenges that we were confronting. i relied on his expertise, and i relied on his judgment. i think it's fair to say that, ash, in your one-year attempt at retirement from public service, you've failed miserably. (laughter) but i am deeply grateful that you're willing to go back at it. ash, as some of you know, brings a unique blend of strategic perspective and technical know-how. as a student of history, he understands the united states -- and i'm quoting him now -- is "the single most provider of security in the world," and he played a key role in devising our defense strategy to advance that security. he's also a physicist, which means that he's one of the few people who actually understands how many of our defense systems work. [laughter] and that has also allowed him to serve with extraordinary breadth

and also depth in a whole range of work that we've had to do. in one way or another, ash has served under 11 secretaries of defense. he's an innovator who helped create the program that has dismantled weapons of mass destruction around the world and reduced the threat of nuclear terrorism. he's a reformer who's never been afraid to cancel old or inefficient weapons programs. he knows the department of defense inside and out -- all of which means that on day one, he's going to hit the ground running. ash is also known by our allies and our friends around the world. having served both republican and democratic secretaries, he's respected and trusted on both sides of the aisle. he's been a close partner with our military leaders. and he's admired by civilian leaders across the department because he's a mentor to so many of them. there's one other quality of ash's service that i think often gets overlooked, and 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 our troops to make sure they had the weapons and the gear that they needed and the quality of life for themselves and their families that they deserve. when our troops in iraq and afghanistan were struggling to defend against roadside bombs, he moved heaven and earth to rush them new body armor and vehicles. it's no exaggeration to say that there are countless americans who 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 any

publicity or fanfare. and i know that 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's core. 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 rebalancing our defense posture in the asia pacific. going forward, our armed forces are, necessarily, going to need to be leaner, but as commander-in-chief, i'm going to make sure that 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, though, we're going to have to bolster some new

capabilities, our cyber-defenses, how we deal with our satellites and how we're adapting our military, and investing in new capabilities to meet long-term threats. we're going to have to work with congress on a more responsible approach to defense spending, including the reforms we need to make the department more efficient. that's how we're going to preserve readiness. that's how we're going to keep faith with our forces and our families. that's how we're going to deliver world-class care to our wounded warriors. and ash is going to be critical to all these efforts. when we talked about this job, we talked about how we're going to have to make smart choices precisely because there are so many challenges out there. and we're going to have to squeeze everything we have out of the resources that we have in order to be as effective as possible. and i can't think of somebody who's 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, who's sitting here, i suspect it would happen really quickly because that's the kind of guy carl is, and carl, i know, has had a chance to work with ash in the past. my hope is, is that 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] and one of his favorites is a

classic by the four tops, "reach out, i'll be there." so, ash, i'm reaching out to you. (laughter) you have been there for us, our troops, our families, our nation. i also know that he's been there for his lovely wife, stephanie, sometimes by skype because he's been traveling. but the sacrifices that stephanie has been willing to make -- this is a team effort, as it is true for our military families. and so we're very 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're going through. stephanie, we thank you for your service. we thank will and ava, who couldn't be here, but we know that they couldn't be prouder of their dad. and with that, i want to let, hopefully, our soon-to-be-new secretary of defense say a few words. [applause]

>> thank you. thank you, mr. president. and, mr. president, mr. vice president, it's an honor and a privilege for me to be nominated for the position of secretary of defense. general scowcroft, my longtime mentor, thank you for being here. and thanks to another longtime mentor, bill perry, who can't 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. and 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 the 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. and 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 to serve our nation with the same unflinching dedication that you demonstrate every day. [applause]

>> halloween the announcement, the chair of the senate armed forces committee, issued a statement.

and committee member john mccain of arizona said -- on facebook, some of you have weighed in on the choice for defense secretary. jeremy says, i hope he works to the rest of his ability and we avoid unnecessary wars. writes >> writes -- and jim says -- and like --itter follow us on twitter and like us on facebook.

>> president obama and the king of jordan met at the white house to discuss ongoing issues in the middle east, including the defeat of isis. after the meeting, they made remarks in the white office -- oval office for about 10 minutes. >> it is a great pleasure once again to welcome my friend, his majesty, king abdullah in the delegation to the what -- the oval office. jordan is one of our most effective and capable and steadfast partners. not only in the middle east but around the world. and my personal friendship with his majesty is something i greatly appreciate. i always enjoy talking to him both for his honesty and good counsel. we had an extensive discussion about some of the challenge that we face in the region.

at the top of the list was our efforts to debilitate and 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 has made. has -- isil we recognize this is long-term and extremely complex challenge, but it's one we feel optimistic we will be able to succeed in. and 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 efforts. that it's a matter of winning over hearts and minds and isolating the extremists in the region. and 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 are able to, within their region and their own communities, 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 is going to 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. we had a -- 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 out 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. and we had the chance to discuss some of the important security issues that extended 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 jordan, a country that -- jordan, a small, resource poor country, but one that consistently steps up and meet its responsibilities. as a consequence, i told his majesty today that we are going to continue with understanding, but that we are going to be increasing the amount to $1 billion a year, and we are going to providing an additional loan guarantee, all of which is designed to reinforce the sort of political and economic reforms that are 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. and 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. so 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. but 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.

which comes at a very difficult time, as you mentioned, of us hosting almost 1.5 million syrian refugees, 20% of our population. this will have a tremendous impact on of all levels. levels.rdanians of all from all of us, a very gracious thank you to you and your people for this very timely support for our country. obviously, and americans have and -- jordanians and 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 and 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. because obviously we need to be able to find a solution between the israelis and palestinians as we move through now this global challenge of extremism that all of us face, muslims, christians, jews, hindus, all of us. 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. to fight the extremists. >> thank you so much. thank you, everybody. thank you very much. thank you. thank you very much. >> next, a form on the u.s. and global responses to ebola. of thehat, a discussion creation of the policing task force. and then the u.s. prison system. tracks on the next "washington journal," then looks at the en looks at the jobs

report and the economy. and then julian discusses the presidential executive actions since the election. and then terry gilliam talks about genetically modified foods in their use in the u.s.. plus, facebook comments and tweets. >> the c-span cities tour, takes a book tv on the road, traveling to u.s. cities learn about their literary life. this weekend, we partner with time warner cable for a visit to waco, texas. >> as we began to receive the yltal to be digitized, -- vin to be digitized, would be and turning over the besides. gospel music was not widely heard in the white community. if it was, it would be the hits and the flipside would be heard last.

-- less. we discovered was how many of the besides -- b side to songs were directly related to the civil rights movement. since the roof through databases on gospel music, we did not know that. we did not know the sheer number of songs like "there ain't no tradition in heaven," type songs , and a time where possessing one of those songs, much less singing it, was it interesting in the deep south. you could do a lot of things in the deep south was singing that sort of song out loud, that is a risk. ask the texas ranger hall of fame, it was set up in a 1976 for the under 75th anniversary of the rangers. it honors at this .30 rangers made major -- at this point 30 rangers that gave their lives under heroic circumstances. we have paintings are portraits of all of those rangers. they begin with stephen f austin. he was very successful with his

rangers. the fought not only to make area reasonably safe for when the texas war for independence broke out, the rangers played a major role in texas gaining independence by saving -- stating off the mexican army long enough to allow the colonists to build their own army and develop a strategy. as a result, texas became its own independent nation, the republic of texas, for 10 years. >> what all of the events for waco saturday -- watch all of the events for waco saturday. >> next, a discussion on the u.s. and global responses to ebola. taking part in the discussion, dr. anthony fauci. this is just over an hour.

[applause] >> thank you very much, and thank you for being here this morning for a very important conversation. we are having an urgent challenge that we face as a global community. you know, over the course of the last year, we have been engaged here in georgetown 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 is it me need to protect -- we need to protect and embrace? and 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 that serve as the underlying framework in which we do all of this work. they are inextricably linked, they are interlocking, 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 a bowl -- 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 degree -- of the disease. and also to understand what

kinds of responsibilities do we have in moments like this. our faculty have engaged in a wide variety of efforts in exploring in research and scholarship, the nature of this disease. and then, of course, 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 this morning to be with two people who are more than any in the country responding to this challenge. and it is a privilege to be in conversation with them. i'm going to start off. the conversation 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. but let's get started. tony, could you give us, just -- this is a disease we have known about since 1976. we have seen other iterations of

it over the 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 seen a particularly -- we have had a particularly intense experience. 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 fundamentally a disease in animals, it is called a zoonotic disease, that is not a disease that has adapted itself evolutionarily to humans. it is fundamentally in animals and then and jumps into humans and spreads by well-defined ways. in 1976, and it likely existed 1976, it was first recognized almost simultaneously and the former zaire,

currently the democratic republic of congo and sudan in which there was an outbreak that was controlled by the way we are still today controlling it, namely 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. in every one of the epidemics jack mentioned, all 24 of them, up until now, ranging in size from two people, to the second largest one was in uganda in 2000, which had 400 people. and they were all able to be put down in the sense of controlled. that jack is talking about is something that is unprecedented because of what i refer to when i talk about this as the perfect storm. and 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. but 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, years ago, were made, that people have relationships across borders. so they are constantly going from one country to another. when you look at the map of west guinea wraps -- itself around sierra leone and

liberia. and we have the issue in big cities. so we have an outbreak 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. 6700 deaths, likely an underestimate, with waves of the epidemic. it looked like liberia was the worst one month ago. got some better control of that now, even though do not claim victory because their matey be -- may be outbreaks. and now sierra leone, more cases last week than there had been in liberia ever. it is just the issue of the arc is doing this in sierra leone, this in liberia, guinea is kind of like this. so that is the way ebola works. it comes in waves. so we are still, even though we are making progress, we are still in a critical, serious situation.

and the thing about ebola, just finally, is that 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. so it is one of those unusual diseases that you have to really put every ember and every spark out. and we are far from that right now. >> thank you, tony. ron, tony has spent his career engaged in addressing infectious diseases. in mid-october, you were minding your own 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 a little bit about the learning curve and how you were able to close some of that 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 in 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. and his request was to try to coordinate what we call the whole of government response. we have virtually every single federal 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. 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 spots on planet earth, and while we are sitting here, there are hundreds of volunteers health care workers in ebola treatment units in care centers in library and 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 jump. >> 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 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 destructive to a society. what i hope comes out of this is a realization by the countries themselves, but the world, the wealthy countries, the organizations 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. 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 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 dr. martin soviet 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 an 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 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. >> 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. i think that in this case, america has to lead. it has. 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 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. it is a humanitarian crisis to see this of a station. 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 right now. so it has been a global response. our leadership has been critical and is something the american people can take pride in. >> if there were other elements in the current structure for addressing a challenge like this, are they needed? or are their existing elements that need to be used more 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 have far, 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 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 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. the best thing we can do in the face of that anxiety is to respond properly with an aggressive response, but one based on science, medicine, and the best possible learning we have. so i think our country was very lucky to have someone like tony fauci, a person who won the 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 manage this disease. the fact all eight of the patients with ebola 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 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

identifying and treating cases have been the key things in bringing the public anxiety down. >> tony, as ron said, you have been at this for a wild. 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? >> 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 is by scientific facts over and over again. i bring the analogy, because it is 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. it is more likely that you will get hit by a car as you walk out of the restaurant then it is summit a you hiv that way.

and then finally, when all of the scientific data was in, people believed it. that is how you counter. you've got to be called. never be pejorative of people who actually disagree with you. even though you think they are unreasonable. keep countering it with scientific-based evidence. and it works. >> 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. as with the hiv-aids crisis, the role of the faith community preaching about compassion, tolerance, about volunteerism.

about non-stigmatization, about service, that is part of the response. there were faith leaders from all faith denominations that were sending people to volunteer to west africa. dr. ken bradley, 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 we reconciled these two

things, and the ebola crisis is a crisis where we need both these things and all helmets and other sponsors in moments of crisis. >> i think you both have captured a couple of important points. i would like to exploit a limited but-for-the. 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, 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 elements. 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 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. so it is a little bit 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 to be considered by the world as a neglected tropical disease because it is on everybody's radar screen. and the one thing i do hope we get out of this is drugs that we prove work and a vaccine that we know works. if there is one silver lining of tragedies like this, it is that you get something out of it so we do not have to go through this the next time. the answer to your question is, in my mind, it is a neglected tropical disease. >> thank you. >> good morning. i'm a junior. i was wondering if you could

speak about the case of thomas duncan and whether his life could have been saved or not. there was a lot of debate surrounding the case, so i was wondering if you could share your opinion. >> you really cannot make those kinds of predictions of having taken care of so many thousands and thousands of patients in my life to say we could have saved his life if we did this. there is always the possibility. 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. people read that it kills 70% that are infected. that is true with no interventions. something no more complicated than putting and i the rehydration is bringing the level down. if you think about the fact that you can cut the death rate of the disease in half by giving someone the most basic kind of health care, it shows you how

important, what a role resources and building 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] >> next, and discussion about the creation of the president's policing task force. then, a discussion about the effectiveness of the u.s. prison system. then, a discussion on the tea party.

tomorrow, a more ill service will be held for mary and barry at the washington convention center. speakers include reverend jesse jackson, cardinal donald world and mark morreale. live coverage begins at 11 a.m. eastern on c-span. here are some of the programs you will find this weekend. saturday at 11 a.m. eastern, live coverage of the memorial service for the former washington dc mayor marion barry. and compton who recently retired over 40 years as abc news white house correspondent. c-span two,ht on the university of new hampshire assistant professor on how the northeast u.s. wasn't always the haven of racial equality and supportive of african-american civil rights. our live opposition with author

and american enterprise president arthur brooks. with your phone calls, e-mails, and tweets. at 8:00, the university michigan professor martha jones on female slaves and the law. at 8:00, president george h.w. bush is former secretary of state james baker on the fall of the berlin wall and the liberation of eastern europe. find out complete schedule at c-span.org and let us know what you think about the programs you're watching. >> next, a discussion about white house efforts on reforming the apartments after

ferguson, missouri and elsewhere. from "washington journal" this is 15 minutes. minutes. questioning us is the president of the international association of chiefs of police who previously served as the police chief, the university of central florida. the altamonteh springs police department. is there a disconnect between the public and police today? >> well, peter, it depends on the community in the u.s.. we see some parts of the country that have incredible long-term community relations between law enforcement and the public and there are some areas that don't. to try to cast it with a broad net is difficult. is there room for improvement? we need to be careful because treaties thatt of

have those wrought relationships. >> what is one of those committees and why are there 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. --