is the world, because the united states is not pulling out. the united states is our closest ally. with all due respect to the important countries, economically, they are and him porridge and country. as we look at the record, look at the record at the united nations. look at the records at the security council. we only have one ally which we really share affection and trust with on so many levels. there is nothing to replace that.

there is also an economic bearing on the israeli economy. and ask ato step back basic question. why is israel moving forward towards elections right now? can anyone explain what happened? >> they have it -- the situation of ake a -- some sort theater act whereby each side for aat the other side situation in which they could not move on together. i think part of it has to do with the ill decisions of benjamin netanyahu who decided he could pull this one again. if you ask me, the israeli public will be faced with a to have, isn't willing a another term of benjamin netanyahu. it will be the key question in

the selection in addition to all of the important issues which you have discussed. following,lect the well israel skid dangerously into the coming into more extreme statement in its behavioral mode as a government. into theorrect itself the-positioned policies that to go together visione original and mint of zionism. understanding regional situations, trying to move towards peace and social justice and alignment with the united states, economic recovery, and most importantly, strengthening our economic development. >> webinar foreign policy security question. current you rank the

threat from iran? the iranian nuclear program particularly to israel? the mostlieve that is important thread? >> it is definitely an important threat. it has to be done with. may i say the following? i think the negotiation process is important. i think the united states and its allies should get the best deal possible. we should enable it to get the best in a possible. but we should not will read anything off the table until we see that dealer. next day and trust in obama administration to get a good deal? i trust the obama administration to get a good deal. most importantly, the fact that on a breakoutee time that will give ample warning to everybody if the

iranians believe they want to agreement and move towards the bomb. i think the professionals have to work on it. give it a chance. nevertheless, we should not be naive. we live in a dangerous and complicated world and region. complications of the iranian regime are glad to us. we should not be naive to believe him as well. there should be strict supervision. very strict monitoring and deciphering of whatever it is going on in relation to that program. >> if you had been prime minister this past summer, how do you have handled the hamas threat? >> first and for most, we should have a combination of diplomacy. when you entered that crisis with less international credit in our hands. to a situation whereby within the secondly, the

international community started already showing shortsightedness in terms of what is going on in gaza, because the pictures that came in -- at of gaza had a bearing and and influence. one has to see heavily deteriorated into that conflict and make sure we do not deteriorate into that again. we need a strong regional coalition that brings in the authority to gaza to give hope to the people of gaza and opens up gaza under strict supervision and moves on as a basis for a process with the palestinians. >> the palestinian authority is a fairly weak and corrupt body. palestinians are divided into two warring factions. you seem to have more faith than the average is really. >> let's be frank about it, we judge everybody

else's political systems. i am not judgmental. if i have to make a decision between, us and the palestinian authority, i believe in working with the palestinian authority" it is feasible. look at the summer. let's put it in perspective. following the abduction of the three boys, which was a huge tragedy for the israelis and for everybody, the palestinians authority functioned properly. the coordinated with us efforts to find their whereabouts. they handled the situation in calming it down despite the fact that what many israeli operations on the ground. they gave protect of edge in the summer in gaza. to turn them as so far they have survived for five israeli prime ministers to the best of my recollection. there you worried about

future of israeli democracy? >> i am worried about the direction which israel late democracy and society is moving into if we do not correct it. that will be event question of the distinguished representative from the right. in a deal that the world will accept unilateral steps of israel in this direction. he does not answer the question of what will you do with 100,000 palestinian citizens who will become israelis. the palestinians who grew up under israeli sovereignty. does that mean we will include another 100,000 who have no loyalty to the state of israel in the sense that they will not be a part of israel but part of

occupation? there is no other choice. despite all the fears, we will have to get over those fears. you have to try again. otherwise, the direction the israeli society is moving into could be bleak. undercurrentsbout that are trying to limit, curtail, the beautiful gift of israeli democracy. the fact that in our parliament there is such a range of views, of's free speech laid down by our supreme court. i do whatever i can with my colleagues to protect it. there are endless efforts. the minister of justice was trying to blog every week another piece of legislation which from the outside, for those with liberal understanding of what democracy is all about, seems incomprehensible.

>> israel is quite obviously a jewish state. what is so bad about passing a law that says israel is a jewish state? i will explain the following. i set it on the floor of parliament when i debated last week. i said that when it comes to the deal with the palestinians, in the final state moments, i think it is correct to say that both states are nation-states. palestine will be the nation-state of the palestinian people and israel the nation-state of the jewish people as it is derived from the november 47 u.n. plan of resolution. but this has nothing to do with israel. citizens must blow they are equal. not only to said, but they must feel it. treadsforward with this undertones, makes the

feeling that to somebody will be preferred over the other. the way the majority treats the minority is essential to the well-being of our society. the community in israel is denominations.l fascinating community, like all communities in israel. many of them want to be part of inclusiveness and the israeli public life. who want to beny secessionists. our duty is to be inclusive of who want to protect the well-being of the state. and to make anybody feel, in any form or manner, that he is not that common is not only a huge against the basic inherent declaration of independence of the state of israel which is our magna carter. >> but i am hearing is it would

be impossible for you to enter a say, with lieberman, who is just proposed a triangle peacee sliced off in a deal. and the arabs of their land transferred. those are israeli citizens. so -- tonight. always --, especially on shabbos. >> again, the coalition is formed on what is agreed on the agreed-upon policy. if there will be a possibility of having agreed-upon guidelines. i will repeat. it has nothing to do with the nationality of people per se. the nationality, per se, came out of many ideas that were define theound to

road nature of israel. that nature has been defined in our declaration of independence. the greatness of our founding fathers is that they did not like to talk too much. they simply came forward with the declaration of independence and then they built a nation. he did not argue about once endlessly that can hurt. religious,nce of interreligious flaring up in all other issues of state is a whole and this mistake to deal with it and to open and unleash all of these genies out of the bottle. do it. >> are you saying the idea of transferring arab villages made up of israeli citizens is not on the table? >> it is not on the table. unconstitutional. not feasible at all. let us forget it. let's put it on the record. it won't work.

general, i invite each and every one of you to understand what you see from the outside is not exactly what you did. you have all groups with different views of life and there are many, many arabs who parties,ded in the big included in my party, and they share an agreement of living together in peace. when i go to an emergency room to say the subject's life, and i , aed the mother and father jewish family, who saved her son's life? they showed me a doctor who treated the sudden saved his life. one of the best surgeons in the country. what have to put everything in perspective. ex will go to questions in a minute. and i want to ask one other thing. problems,l have pr where does israel have problems?

>> both. i do not wear well the fact that , however i doed biblicalve in the proverb of people that to dwell on alone. in this day and age, we cannot dwell alone. we have to have connections and cooperate. our economy boosts into internal strength. we cannot go on saying to everybody, crying out loud, rio the ones who are besieged. we have our problems. to around lot of hate the world. there is a lot of cynical undertones. that has nothing to do with the fact that we have problems. we have to present era policies correctly. you have to change our policies correctly. i compared to israel to midsize

ship in stony waters in high seas that has to maneuver in the estonian rodders correct way. a situation where we find anyelves ordered without ability to maneuver. that is our problem. a question, back to and want to get you on record as much as possible. i asked moten that this question that the summer about the piece process. to think of that as starting 20 years ago with oslo. palestinians, with representatives before there was a nationality and organization, have had for five opportunities over the last 80% years, starting with the appeal before 37 to have a state, each time it has gotten worse from a territorial standpoint. is a question that plays the left in israel, after

80 years of being rejected, of having the division of the land by the palestinians or other representatives, i want them back to this. what moshe think of this now, and fairly and is precious time, but makes you think now is the time to try to move towards a two-state resolution? process. been a long you are ignoring oslo and the of 1968.rocess it is a totally different ballgame and over again. today there is an intense interface. is that within the palestinian and israeli camp, the people are losing faith in the possibility of separating and coming to the two-state solution. it is nor in 1994.

there is a huge majority for road and both peoples. unfortunately, on both sides, it led to the fact that we got into a stumbling blocks with no possibility of moving forward and then we'll repeated a time and again. it is the easiest thing, to tread on the psychology of fear. my adversaries in the political system, especially from the right, tread on fear. i am trying to challenge that and say we cannot live on fear. we have to be lucid. you have to be careful. we have to be protective. we must talk. it cannot be that the mothers in the father-son lever side to not want peace. why would anyone over the age of 35 with children commit suicide? and such are the people they are working with all their life in a

synagogue? have to understand what comes from and make an effort and not say all the arab world and the muslims cannot make peace with us. we have to try. >> word is that impulse to suddenly slaughter come from? >> it is against any moral, legal, or human values. . . it is shocking. nonetheless, and you look at the picture, you must analyze. in order to naturalize these elements, we must bring hope. we cannot give up on that. >> thank you very much for this conversation. we're going to open it up. [applause] >> thank you both. thank you both for a great interview. would likeople here

to see a change in government. i am not going to express my opinion it so i'm going to shut up about that. however, when i look at the members and i count the numbers and i put the right on one side of the aisle and i put the left on the center of the other, and take up the arabs, it just cannot happen. would you be willing to give us some numbers about how you think primen become the next minister? >> because i say that you think people do not understand. us take that of a microcosm of the analysis. first, the ultra-orthodox community has shifted dramatically to the other direction. wereutchered rabbis who

praying. front of 1000 people, the widows, and the first widow said, we have to think about the way we treat others. just as an example, ok? nobody picked up on it. why get interested in those groups out there who we are striking them out. absolutely wrong. remember, the coalition. of why just one example arele in all communities struggling with an inner debate of where to go. it is not a question of left or right. it is a question of where we go from here. henry move in peace? that is why i believe a normal configuration.

player in the election. assume, at least, he will not roll out any coalition. definitely a centrist coalition. i say there will be a moment of moved to thatthey direction we skated into the abyss of a total deadlock and the rest of it is clear to us. >> so, no numbers? ask there is no reason to write numbers right now. the beginning of the election. those politicians, analysts, did know know-how to start a elections, not end them. two questions.

here is an idea that the founder of the labour party rights, statism. is right, certain state sensibilities. -- no noeone who is no. [indiscernible] hit that israel emitter which is wanting that kind of labour party, which has approach?of >> uniting of furnaces with centrist forces. -- uniting our forces with centrist forces.

we share values. i have respect. we all understand the inherent dangers that face israel, and we therefore must share together the ability to bring a change. >> you mentioned the social justice piece of this thing and how to 5% of israel come together. it is quite unique. but yet, netanyahu won the election after that. he is still ahead in the plans. maybe you'll come up because you will unite -- >> do you want to depress me? >>: masking year is why hasn't been able to capitalize on blood is in its natural constituency, which is the socialist

movement, and how has the right been more successful? >> those of a national commission meant -- a national commission on that problem. only one out of dozens of accommodations were argumentative. the truth of the matter is, and it was -- you enjoyed the fruit of that process. >> you did not join the netanyahu movement during the peace process because of your skepticism. i am asking you, it if netanyahu won the election, would you were --owed ringing him in under going in under his leadership or bringing him in under your leadership? >> i am telling you we're focused on winning the election. without a respect, i do not mind

inviting netanyahu to my government if he would accept the guidelines. at ministry but he get? >> i am trying to explain this to you. you have to understand. i am not hallucinating. it is not easy, it is complicated. politics is a game of clear , there is enormous frustration with the israeli public in general and body politic in particular as to what is happening in israel. in thell be reflected election results. it is a bit of an uncomfortable subject in this room, but would you agree as sort of an old hand in israeli politics, that sometimes at

election time the united states government tries to exert influence one way or the other. you might be the beneficiary this time if they did. expert perhaps not true, perhaps the other way around. expert ever you see from here is not what you see from there. beware. from here?our view >> >> what is your view from here? >> i think the united states is wise enough to know not what to do in an election process. you are talking about the elections in terms of being crucial for israel.

i sort of think the direction of the results of that election is world. for the jewish and world where i see the younger generation finding it more difficult to connect. your view ofed in what responsibility the israeli officials have? >> a valid point. the vehicle of the diaspora on young peopleat think is not reflected adequately in the israeli media at all or in the israeli discourse. what we see, is we see the main jewish leaders expressing support of israel. and you not see the grass roots. we do not see certain streams of disenchant it. israel as the

true homeland of our people, we have to work towards that. we have to foster and strengthen and taken into account in what we do as well. absolutely. for example, i think the whole game of dealing with and touching temple mount was extremely dangerous and adverse to the basic interest of israel and the dsp. -- ofleashed a very israel and the dsp. diaspora. palestinians where do this wild horse, and i think the ministers cannot do these steps without understanding their

affects on synagogues all over the world. it is interesting to note that the rural sages of the time, the orthodox leaders of the time who weren't against going into temporal mount. mount.ng -- the temple including my grandmother. -- grandfather. ask questions of that, the leaders of religious and ins them. >> there is a big debate in this country. americanlieve young, jews are becoming disenchanted with israel because of israeli policies or are they growing distant from israel because they are growing distance from it being jewish? >> i am going to avoid answering that. that followrojects

suit, like masala and others, they are incredibly important to to israelnew feeling and the young generation. the generation is the young generation, sometimes they do not know the cap picture. sometimes they buy bottled up on their own social networks. of broader andes tax and so forth, sometimes it is lost in the discourse. i think young american jews are a challenge both for israel as well as for the organized jewish community. this includes the hillels and the others who are trying to bring them as a community into israel.

>> my empathy. -- i have been interviewed a couple times by jeff kilburg, and you can see the color of my hair. not easy. i am going to ask you the same question i asked you last year. there is a tendency when i listen to you to look at the palestinians is some kind of two-dimensional prop for an israeli morality play. they do not have agency. they have no control over their own destiny, where in control. but of course, that is not true. palestinians have ultimate agency. they have walked a from negotiations after israel released listeners. they have gone to the u.n. and have declared a palestinian state unilaterally without giving us peace. with the express intention of going to the icc and sanctioning us. in the face of jordan and iraq

and syria unraveling, the chances do you think of the palestinian state with a corrupt, i'm leadership is going to adhere for a long time. why would you put your trust in them? i understand the idea of holding a two-state solution as a vision, but it is a very pretty vision. that information is not a policy. can you look at palestinian agency and the like, and what is your policy? what is your initiative? where do you better if he was going to go to the u.n. imposed sanctions on us through the icc? cannot -- what is your policy? >> i would say the following. the undermining of function in what you said, which is based on

fact. i do not argue with the fact except i do not accept the idea that therefore it is over. i definitely do not think it is true. i do not think the fact that there is a palestinian leadership calls for me to ignore it. about these comments doing it without the palestinian leadership or people seems futile. there is a golden opportunity acceptable by all. there is a unique convergence of interest that has been there for a long time that emerge throughout the summer with our adjacent neighbors, egypt and jordan, both extremely distinguished. i know the egyptian ambassador, may i say that i think one needs that he is a very important player in the region.

i say it here in washington, because it took time that washington understood the importance that they need to work with him as well. these two neighbors are there, now we need to enter to the equation the palestinian authority. and then you have a table with a leg of floor. jordan, palestinian, and israel. they can work together in building a process, getting backing from the united states. yes. innovativeness, initiation, and a plan on the table. next the last question for the minority leader will come from the minority leader. >> it will not be a question. it will be a comment. again, thanking the brookings institution and all of you in joining and welcoming all the guests from israel and to you,

mr. chairman. i just could not let one commented that i heard stand. while it is true that israel and many partners of israel have friends in the united states who may want to help them, but with the presence of other members of congress, ice -- cannot stand that we would be available in part of the election. theould not be part of election process. i do not know if that was a casual reference or if you are referring to private individuals assisting, but the united states government does not yet involved in elections in other countries. that is our policy. thank you. >> i am sorry i am kind of jumping the line for one more question, but it is something that is really on my mind and i appreciate you giving me the

opportunity. the vast majority of american are either reform or conservative. muchmajority is pretty reject it in israel from a conversion standpoint and others. risk intaking the jeweryof losing american than reforming them? realizing that they can be very good jews? some people need to be rejected, and they are. how would you deal with this, if it is a theoretical question? do not give me the harrowing response. you, i have huge respect for the reform in and

conservative movements. what a vastl you relationship of cooperation we come we colleagues have gender and women issues, and we deserve a clap as well. anyway -- [applause] the issue is the following. strength ofrowing those movements in israel. those movements have been advocating for years, telling their leaders, if you want to succeed in israel compete in the market. market. stop complaining and attacking all day long. found communities. it communities. in the history

to grant construction of the reform and conservative movements. none of you know where of it, but this has gone on for many years. i can tell you more than that. we have come to many arrangements in israel. the new conversion has changed. involved in an. other party members advocated it. many changesre are you understand. it is not that the conservatives and reformers are shunned. the issue of marriage is under the bennett law. that is a big issue -- rabbinic law. that is a big issue to debate. that does not mean it will not change. i will not go into many details but i will explain the following. take the issue of the day

community. gay-lesbian community in israel. in many respects, dispense hear from the outside, that we're seeing a more conservative country, in this respect as well as one of the more advanced communities. it started with a lot of animosity. today, i am trying to say without giving kind of words to anybody or saying i am telling you that there are many processes which you are unaware of. the relationship with the -- ervative it is the dialogue we hold with israel and abroad. >> thank you very much. thank you everyone. [applause]

>> ladies and gentlemen, thank you very much. foreign delegates, who will see tomorrow morning. our program begins at 9:00. >>, a conversation with former governor jeb bush. later, q and a with former abc news correspondent in compton. -- en compton. outlinerow we will priorities for global climate change. kim will present information on climate change. this will be on c-span two.

>> monday night in the words firsts, the digital weapon. a computer virus used to sabotage iran's nuclear and richmond company. a virus that was defined to specifically destroy something. passwords, credit card numbers, things like that. what if never seen something that was designed to physically destroy a something using kinetic activity. other than that, it was very sophisticated. as i mentioned, it was designed flow of thehe centrifuges. while doing that, it also did this remarkable trick which was to make the operators at the operations that the were perfectly normal. but it did was a recorded normal

activity on the computer's first, then played back that normal activity to the military machines when it was actually doing the sabotage. >> monday night at 8:00 eastern on c-span 2. >> here are a few of the comments were a solution from bureaus. here are a few of the comments we have recently received from viewers. congratulate you for putting together two different ideologies like you did this morning. i think you need more programming that way among people who are conducting themselves with a very civil tone and i applaud you for that. ideology can be overcome to reach a common ground and i think there should be more programming to that effect. thank you very much for c-span.

>> i listened to c-span pretty much on a database is. i find it to be very informative. -- on a daily basis. informative be very and helps to understand what is happening in congress. it seems that congress is undecided or i was fighting. it is important that the citizens can see have the proceedings are going on. i appreciate c-span and regardless of whether or not it mainstreamwith culture, i just hope there are young people watching c-span on a regular basis. i watch it to make sure i understand what is happening in my country because i truly care. starting with the battle of

little big horn, i just watched it. it is prices. said the world did not understand them, but if they watch american history, they can see themselves and we are such ay great and wonderful nature of all the people of the world. >> continue to let us know what you think about the programs you are watching. us or send usail a tweet. join the c-span conversation, like us on facebook, follow us on twitter. former florida governor jeb bush told an audience on monday that he is thinking of running for president in 2015. he was a featured guest on the wall street journal's ceo council.

is 35 minutes. 45 minutes. >> governor bush is on the left. ?hat does that mean >> to our right. >> you are to their right, so it is ok. you brought your coffee so you can get over coffin aided -- over caffeinated that we talk. of will miss declared right my leaving just-in-time tonight. thank you for being with us. to get ready for this conversation, i read some speeches you have been giving lately and discovered that one of the significant development of 2014 is that to you became an

grandfather for the third time. and you told me you're about to become the grandfather for the fourth time. >> that was in my speeches? once.e than i had the privilege of covering -- when i tell people i covered the bush white house they think i mean your brother. it is a sign of age. bush, i had the privilege of going to kennebunkport and there is plenty of room there for more children, great children, and children of every age. >> can i bring up the question of privilege and pride which relates to my father? my first granddaughter is now three years old. her name is georgia helena walker bush. is nickname in our family 41.

georgia represents the new america, which i know at least on the editorial side of the wall street journal, they believe in, the new america is an america that does not have hyphens. america where your work and identity, not some political identity form of things. in political identity today, georgia would be a canadian, iraqi, texan, american. still americans aren't they? >> barely. >> i am from texas, my wife is from mexico, jeb was born in florida, sandra's parents were born in iraq. add is the america that we should aspire to. dividingne that we are ourselves up to define where we are different. the fact that we are from a

different place, or you have a different origin is totally irrelevant. when georgia fills out the form when she was 21, 18 years from now, she will say "not account -- "not e."licable to accou [laughter] [applause] >> you said this, you said the united states is experiencing a crisis of opportunity. >> i think we're missing the opportunity to take advantage of our strengths. we focus and fight over our weaknesses. there is massive gridlock. unprecedented gridlock. yet, this is the most extraordinary country in the world. this country is so much better

when you hear the director general of the ims talk about the places in the world. not beted states should in any category remotely close to any problem country. we have everything that is necessary. abundant natural resources. creative. workload by laws that are unique in the developed world. a big place, full of chances to expand. the history of productivity. all of the stuff that has been cast aside temporarily and were moping around like we are france. with all due respect. the french have a great -- a lot of great things going on in their lives. they have a lot of interesting things and great things. but we're not france, for crying out loud. the crisis of opportunity is we're not seizing the moment. be young aspiring to and dynamic at again.

if we fix if you really big, substantive things, we could be american a>> sandwich a good, se things. >> do you want them in order of a porton's -- impotence? --importance? >> and energy policy based on north american resources. all-in. be energy-secure with mexico, canada, and the united states within five years. avarua spoke to that, we could do that. and regulatory economy based on the current century. we're putting old, complicated moves on top of old, complicated rose. we have lost our dynamic nature thisse -- i have asked question of a lot of people that have made it.

and most of you, all of you have. and you have done what you have done starting over now? a lot of people would admit that they could not come as the barriers to be successful today are much more deeper and more complex. to transforma way every aspect of human endeavor in the 20 first century is one of the great challenges. simplifying the tax code so that we take power away from washington and give it back to people to determine to let them determine how to make investments. left-handedto give albanian tax credits right-handed croatian tax credits, then come to america. that is what we have got. the most complicated tax code. loading deductions, led through the ring. that is the third thing.

the fourth thing is immigration reform, because it is something that is unique and special to this country. if we would create an promoterlly-driven control and will move the road from family the unification being close to the site driver of how people come to this , 70-80% come through family petitioning and we dramatically expanded economic emigrants, which we have the capability of doing and that is not necessarily an ideological partisan issue, we could in thatce create an america would have the first 200 thousand 300,001st-round draft picks. weren't you trying to be an owner of the football team? >> he still is.

be the equivalent of fred smith trying to be the owner of a football team. you could pick who you would want to come to this country. and they would come. it would create economic vitality the likes of which people have no understanding of. this is an extraordinary company. it is a missed opportunity not to do that. and we need radical transformation on how to educate the next generation. it is not working. reform is important, the transformation should be the bigger argument. we're not even close. this is a place where i am completely frustrated. those five things should get us to the plaintiff we started to do some of those, then we could do the other big thing, which is not going to happen anytime soon. entitlement reform. no developed country in the world has been able to achieve this. ande do it, will be young

dynamic and emerge again rather than a developed country. whatever be the first country in the world that will be a brick up. but we're have to change the acronym. video card? i don't know? " -- we replace the "r could do that. it will be the first time in history that is happen. it will be the first time in a sea rising income for the middle class again. we will be much less pessimistic about the future. we pick up on that. immigration and education. the roadblock to comprehensive immigration reform in this town for the last year has been frankly, you're a party in the house. where is the gap between what you just said and the reality on the ground? equal in the

president of the united states of the united states uses powers that he may or may not have that that he clearly knows will be to useovocative executive powers to try to deal with immigration, that did that is not provocative and a deterrent? and you don't think that -- >> the problem came arguably from the preceding year. next not now. >> i would argue that there is enough blame on both sides. we have missed opportunities on our side to shift the focus away from the argument of certainly controlling the border to have a shift to an economically-driven system? is no trust anymore that the executive will enforce the law. so we're stuck. this is actually the easier thing of the five things i mentioned.

it is the one where there is less political discord, in my opinion. it is so huge shame because it is the easiest way to get to sustained economic growth, which is what we desperately need. so, hopefully the republicans rather than have their heads explode that the executives actions which i think are -- i am not a lawyer so i cannot say they're unconstitutional, let's call them extra-constitutional. they are stretched beyond that the executive authority by any other president has been used. it, mya that reagan did dad did it, they did about a much smaller scale and with the consent of congress. there are a lot of difference between what happened 30 years ago and what happened now. trust makes it harder for it to happen. it is a shame. we ask is your problem with that

the president did with the way? >> it is the way, first of all. i do not know the exact details. frankly, to do something -- he did not permanently change things because he does not have anywhere near that kind of authority to do it. he did it, he extended -- he granted deferral of the execution of the law for a couple of years. so these people are still in limbo. what we need to do is get some certainty for the 11 million people here, 5 million of which he doubled, we need to find some certainty to get them some legal status and move to a system that is economically driven. the system we have today, we're the only country in the world that has bad, minor children, --d siblings, and adult as immediates,

family. if we could emulate the canada model, which is totally economically driven. 15-16% of immigrants come from family petitioning and 70-75 percent come on economic need. believe it or not, canada is sophisticated enough to know whether shortages of labour. wow, that a radical innovation to be able to know that. i imagine we could probably figure that out with people in this room alone in the united states. if we had the same system, narrowing federal petition and call them the aspirational class. people could come here and make an immediate impact on our economy. guess what? we'll regret a more sustained road. why any democrat, liberal, or republican would be opposed to that.

at education.t --- i do not know why any democrat, liberal, or republican would be opposed to that. >> the monopolistic nature that puts the economic interest of the adults in a system, which in largestmunities is the employer for those who do not live in washington or new york. if you go to tennessee or texas or florida, outside the biggest center is the school

district. it has a big economic interest rather than focus on that is the problem. is the governance model is designed for the adults rather than the children. reforming it on the edges isn't going to change that. on this,st my patience to be honest with you. i don't see the change necessary to get to model that we could get to. if we started from scratch, we wouldn't have this system. we wouldn't have unionized politicized government run monopolies as the means by which children learn. we would have something that would be child centered, customized for their needs and notould use technology, just kind of to for vendors to computers to school tisdale districts which is a great it buts if you can get are it at the core of learning. learn at your own pace at you own time. variable and learning is the constant rather

than 180 days with the little the seat being the means by which the school system is not.d whether you learn or the constant is time and where the variability is whether you learn. a radical, you know, departure from where we are and there is no place in the country that has come close to achieving that. we need to strive for and now we have this weird protecting theis status question for different reasons. an alliance that is quite powerful politically that doesn't agree on anything other than we shouldn't be able to dramatically change how we educate kids versus i think there is a -- i think there is a path that starts with high standards but doesn't end there. starts with that and empowers to make decisions for their children. argues for the learning completelyto be cowboy testimonyized. customized. digital learning can occur. a big change in how we

bargain because god forbid if the content is provided by someone in seattle in miami.ent all sorts of changes that require big-time fights politically and there is not a people on the frontlines right now. >> you know, speaking of big you fights politically, have been willing to engage on two those on this front. involves common core standards and the second involves testing. argue bothntinued to those things are part of the answer here. >> sure. >> well, common core standards higher standards so if a state wants to be honest and say that their standards are 10th great level and they need to know,them so that, you look, here is the deal -- you all know this because you are concerned about it in your states where you work, where your employers work, a third of kids maybe, 40% at best and that is only because i'm be politici-facted, 40%

are college or career ready. we spend more per student than in the worldntry other than two or three, maybe four at the best and we have the videolts in beforehand, general dempsey passd about 25 percent rate. that is not just because of the tests. that is also because of obesity tattoos, to be honest with you, on visible body tryingor people that are to get into the military. but the pass rate for high school level tests to join the or 40% at best and these are abysmal numbers. horrific numbers yet there is no one marching in the streets and saying the end it near because of this. is the end is near if we can't fix this. just cast off large numbers of young people saying well, it is their family circumstances, it is poverty, we

validate this. it.ncourage we actually, you know, make it more real that it is going to often.more and it is a tragedy that i think we should not accept. standards is part of this. and how do you -- if you don't measure you really don't care. nonmeasurement is the great way doesn'tsure that it matter that kids can be cast aside. unions oppose, you ofw, joe klein is a friend mine, the former chancellor of schools said republicans oppose national standards, i guess even though these aren't national standard, the common core standards and democrats -- actually republicans oppose national and democrats oppose standard. coalition that wants to keep what we have even though people cannot defend the have.s that we we have to figure out a way to

create a new coalition. andaps more radicalized with a greater sense of urgency to get to a better place. that aree other things doable aren't going to solve a problem of big social strains that will happen with the have and have notes coming because children haven't gained the of knowledge. >> let me shift to the washington scene for a second here. all gather here at a time of fairly significant change in the this capital is going to work. advise the new republican majority in congress agenda?their what ought to be on their list toto dos and frankly, not dos? lotot to do is to focus a of energy on things that are that ar are just going statement, make a point. i think the republicans have gained the majority and

theeased the majority in house. we don't have to make a point anymore as republicans. can in to show that we an adult like way govern, lead. whether the president signs up republicans in congress offer up is up to him. it shouldn't be too much of of a worry for the republican leadership in congress. they should lead. things thattake the are possible to achieve, they should try to forge consensus with democrats in the congress and they should start passing bills. there were 360 or 370 bills that passed the house that never got hearing. not one hearing in the senate in this last or the soon to end congressional cycle. it is unprecedented. it never happened before that of in american history where democracy was shut down in the senate. republicans need to go back to regular order way to heard, tobills to be encourage amendments on the floor, to allow for the debate

to get back to the point where we are starting to complain that the senate is a again.ative body because right now, no one could claim that. literally -- could i mean they do nothing. showing the adult centered kind leadership where you start dealing with even if it is not things which require presidential action, but xl pipeline.he accelerating on energy, accelerating the leasing of waters fords and exploration. it could be consideration of the ofting of the ban on exports crude at the appropriate time when we don't have the refining the lighto take on crude that is fast being country.in our it could be accelerating the process for lng

plants to use the tool to create a better balance of payment situation, more economic activity for the billions of dollars invested in the jobs createcreatedcreated in our ownd deal with the problem of russia it relates to its blackmail potential over europe because of natural gas. things thatlot of republicans can do and i don't think we should worry so much president will react. my guess is he will engage. hise doesn't, fine, that is prerogative. republicans need to show they are for a bunch of of things and tough to beot of done. whether it is on internet or net neutrality or patent protection or tort reform. there is a lot of things that republicans i think have the ability to garner 60 votes in senate on. healthcare reform. not just to repeal obama care replace it with something that fits the 21st century now have.that we

this should be a time of incredible possibility for showlicans to be able to what they believe in. >> you were obviously a two-term governor. a chief executive and dealt lots of different combinations. what is your advice to each part of this dysfunctional relationship in washington? to thent on one hand and congress on the other on how to get beyond what everybody agrees has been an unsatisfactory dynamic? >> i think the president has because theere presidency is occupied by one person and the president could the culture almost immediately if that was his wish. require sucking it up a little bit. i mean it would require, you is hard because the that'm sure he views it is everything that i propose, everything that i believe in the

and so i willpose react to that. but he has the upper hand person thats one could do it. and the presidency still matters in the country. he does it or not, i'm certainly no expert. i think the leadership of the on the right path based on my conversations with them to focus on things that can be done and do them. a budget. five or six years. that sounds like a really radical idea, but i think they will pass a budget. they will actually go to committee. talk about priorities. and they will go through the regular order way during the year, which will be quite hopeful that we get back to a place where people can have different views and they sort those things out through the process where a budget is hopefully with less deficit going forward and the can respond to that. and if he engages i think it bel help his legacy, to

honest with you, but if he seats the stage for a 2016 election which is going to elections which is you republicans are a party of no and we are for progress. arecan't say that if you just opposed to any action that the congress takes version i think it as a huge responsibility and a great opportunity for republicans to show what it looks like if conservative leadership gets washington. >> okay. said 2016, so -- [laughter] >> as you know, i will have to in my white house correspondent's association card if i don't ask you this question. think about 2016 and yourself? >> oh, me personally? >> yes. >> oh. '16 is like any other year. >> kind of like any other year. >> so i'm thinking about running will makeent a and i up my mind in short order. not that far out into the future. exact timeline.

it is the same decision-making had whichat i always is can i do it in a way -- do i have the skills to do it in a to lit people's spirits and not get sucked into the vortex. easy, easy to say, harder to do. do i have those skills? really do a lot of soul searching to really make that determination. more important, can i do it where the sacrifice for is tolerable. every person that runs for a big at any level, it is sacrifice because it is a pretty ugly business right now. saying oh, woe is me wrong withn't get me you there is a level at which i would never subjugate my family organizingt is my principle. that is my life. i'm sorting that out. adon't know if i would be good candidate for a bad one. i know, i kind of know how a

republican can win, whether it is me or somebody else and it has to be much more uplifting, positive, much more willing to, you know, to be now in washington world, lose the primary to win violatingl without your principles. not an easy a task to be honest with you. question that kind of reverb rated through the last couple of republican nominating cycles are the things that you win a republican nomination contrary to what you need to do to win the general election. >> frankly, no one really knows that because it hassen been been recently so -- hasn't tried recently, so. my personal opinion is mitt romney would be -- would have been and would be a great president right now. i honestly believe that. a problem solver. his life experience was tee designed to here is a problem, let's go fix it.

idelogicalhe differences. point a too from point b to fix it. i can imagine lots of power goingpresentations and from point a to point b and fixing things and that would be healthy right now because our government isn't working in a century way. put aside democrat, republican idea lodge cal. it is just not woking at the expect andyou would it is because we never transformed how government works for people. businesses isour radically different than it is much less five years ago. yet if you walk into the halls of government today in looks kind of like 1975. we got to got to -- figure out a way to get to the point of beginning to fix this stuff. to take think you have

that risk. >> let me ask you one last to open and then i want it up to these good folks for questions. tell you thatgut 2016 election regardless of whether you are involved or not, is it about the domestic situation in the u.s. or is it going to ultimately be more about u.s. role in world? >> six months ago i would have a continuatione of the focus on domestic issues because they are big and they are challenging. there is a growing awareness that we can't withdraw from the world that there is an unraveling taking place and it impacts our -- not jut our interests but our check interests as well. -- our economic interests as well. foreign policy and maybe a reevaluation of what the role of the waits is in the world -- of united states is in the world will become important and there are competing forces to deal withes this. i would argue that an engaged better for america

than a disengaged america. i would argue that a president needs to speak few words but those words need to be -- they need to resonate. they need to be real. they need to be taken to the friends and foe alike. i would argue that we need to rebuild our military and intelligence capabilities. not so p intelligence but persuade people that the in tell against capabilities we have keep us and and they are important they are not a violation of civil liberties but a means by which we can be free from the jihadist attacks that are happening and will happen at a greater pace if we continue to retrench. isould argue that free trade part because people that trade together and become positive wayt in a economically are less likely to create friction diplomatically or militarily. there is a lot of discussion

that needs to be had about what is the proper role for america would argue that the traditional role that democrats presidents alike have had since world war ii americanan invigorated leadership is the proper role for our country. probably couldt become a bigger issue. there hassee who out a question they want to ask. couldthere and if you wait for the microphone, that would be great. ever. >> thank you, governor bush for your thoughts. lines, governor bush, just to go back to the point you touched on, trend lines today seem to suggest a time of extraordinary opportunities across all vectors of human enterprise. ofdlines suggest one conflict. i think as you point out is going todership be pivotal to whether through

cooperation we are able to the trendlines or whether we will give way or headlines one of conflict. question or rather i would be thoughts onn your can american leadership rise to occasion? >> absolutely we can. i mean we have done it time and time again. key to this to make a -- you know, to get to a point policy where america's leadership in the world is accepted by a great of americans is that we are growing economically here first. mean if you ask the former head of the joint chiefs of current one the what the great -- or the current one what the great threat for america is they would would say deficit and the lack of economic opportunity for people. it is not that we are incapable of, you know, defending the sea lanes in southeast asia. we have the capability of doing. we still have a, you know,

superiority that is challenge, certainly second to none. so if we started to grow again where instead of having declines in median income iich we had the first time think in american history where we had a recession where we have median incomein instead of having that we had where theian income middle class was more optimistic about their children's future think thereture i would be not just an acceptance but an embrace of a more active engaged american foreign policy ad that would do the world whole lot of good. because but for us, who? who? capability of providing security and stability in places that are being disrupted by all sorts of religious,ltural,

technological. the world is being, you know, disrupted some in good ways and some in really bad ways and we there is nous source of stability that allows that transformation to take peaceful way. so my hope is that people are much more optimistic about our the world because their life is getting better and that policy thatoreign is more naturally suited for the today,states which is still, the only super power in the world. id if we act accordingly think we create a more and a moreworld secure world. >> right there. >> governor bush, you know, lately in the news some of democratic from the side have started to question the focus of the political capital after the 2008 election. in other words, where are the agendats focused their right after this election. >> yes. >> and you brought up five areas

thingsguess there were like energy and regulation and immigration and tax and education. realities,litical political viscosity limited you to one or two, what would you on?s >> well, i mean the two easiest thats can we do it like so you are successful and then you can create a climate where you successful?e can i change the question to do that. it doesn't work that way where going to -- you can't ignore these issues that need to be fixed. but i would say the two big things that would be the jump starty to investment in our own country higher wage jobs rather than lower wage jobs over a sustained period of time is an policy that celebrates this incredible revolution that taken place that is something thatth should be bands for rather than concern about, which is the

owngy renaissance in our can country. and the in know vision that is being applied -- innovation each and every day to make it even more beneficial. the way of that and encouraging it to happen at a fatter pace and immigration thatm which is something if we could give people confidence we could control our border and shift from a broken immigration system to one that first 250,000have or 300,000 first round draft picks. the other issues become easier to fix because we are growing youit is not based on, trying divvy up a smaller pie. those are the two things that less politically, believe it or not, wouldn't appear that way if you read the news. are the less challenging issues that allow us to get in a place to deal with the bigger issues. in the interim there are possibilities of dealing with some issues on smaller scale and

i think that is what the will do.ns in congress my guess is that there will be efforts to reform corporate example. and my deal with the worldwide income challenge -- might deal the worldwide income challenge and reversion absurdity. to have an ing version absurdity ought to be the other way around. to be that foreign companies are buying u.s. businesses to relocate here. be beneficiary of the absurdity rather than suring from it. it -- rather than suffering from it. it could create the chance to bring back $2 trillion in cash. companies in this room i'm sure have cash overseas where would punishders you. life be that four year expectancy might go to three baited on shortsided policies. move to a strategy that allowed to us bring back some of that money at a fixed perhaps you reduce the deficit and cree crate an

infrastructure fund that republicans and democrats would like and batch it with pension fund money and create half a trillion dollars of infrastructure moneys that could talking outm just loud here so this is blue sky stuff so whoever is going to tweet this or whatever, please cavout 80 this. had $500 billion and projects of national importance of infrastructure, don'tthy think that would lit america.ts of where bottle necks would be resolved. brought toould be every school instead of taxing people administer on their cell proposal in is the front of the f.r.c. i believe right now. there are ways to solve problems bipartisan way and get to a point where the complexity of doesn't retard -- in otherestment cup country.

that should be done already. that should have been done, you three years guy. my guess is if -- ago. my guess is if the president wants to engage that is something that the republicans and he could agree on. >> i think we have time for one last question. right here. >> governor, maybe just a comment or two on the united you seend china and how this playing out and what that to.tionship could evolve >> it could evolve to a really place, particularly if we pull back kind inform a fashion. the threat of that is there and we should be cognizant of it. also could yield economic engaged if we are fully across the board. i thought that hank paulson's to create and i think the obama administration has to createthis, constant dialoguepy sector,

private sector as well as government, secretary to arrangementsd of where the misunderstandings are lessened is hugely important. i traveled a lot to china. trip was last year. i didn't go -- actually, i didn't go this year, i went last year. and every meeting i had on that trip i believe it was or maybe it was the second-to-last trip, it was right after the summit between the chinese president and president obama in palm reading theh by "wall street journal" which is my newspaper of record,. to say that. him >> looked like it was a pretty good summit and worked out good to me. i don't know. generally there seemed to be good dialogue. every person that i met brought up the fact that mrs. obama isen wasn't at the summit. news here because

frankly, you know, i -- i was a mom.g well, she is her children are in white house for crying out loud. pretty hard. we didhe had to do what for our kids in 7th or 8th grade, probably had to do the science project with them. thingsas normal motherly that she had to do and ha is the american way. the chinese viewed it as an insult to their very glamourous first lady. such very, when you have big cultural differences and if you have had experience in china you know this much better than completelye to be immersed, completely engaged to eliminate the stupid things from problems because there is going to be big things that are going to create problems with our will disagree actions and we will disagree with them. and i think that ought to be the effort is to have full

comprehensive engagement. ignore china as it moves, you know, as it emerges world power. and then the the second thing i would say is that if you reach aat point where there is level of trust that is high and an expert to know where we stand today in that regard then we out to encourage china to take a leadership role in helping solve global problems. that everything on their foreign policy can't be about simply their economic interests. aat they need to play constructive role in a lot of different ways that today they do.t feel compelled to factut i know for a retrenching will create misunderstandings that are going economic huge hardships for both sides and perhaps as china grows and asserts itself in the region, you know, something than that.

>> governor bush, we are out of time. we have to home run the to let you -- honor our commitment to get you get home. this conversation and the one earlier helped set up the conversations tomorrow and appreciate very much your being for you we are grateful to helping us get launched this way. >> thanks for the invite. you.ank [captioning performed by the national captioning institute which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] moments, a senate hearing on what professional sport is are doing about the violence. domestic with ann compton. and live at 7:00 a.m., your calls and comments on "washington journal." [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] bank president jim yong kim on priorities for climate change. efforts for discuss

an international agreement to be presented at the 2015 climate change conference held in paris. live coverage of his speech at 12:15 p.m. eastern on c-span2. >> tonight on the communicators. computer virus used to sabotage iran's nuclear program. >> the mott unique thing is this was a virus that was designed to physically destroy something. the past, we have seen malware that steals passwords and credit card numbers but they are have seen something that was destroy,to physically essentially leap out of the digital world into the physical have kin etic activity. it is designed to increase and the the speed of

centrifuges. but while it was doing that, it trickid this remarkable which was to make the operators at the plant think that the operations were perfectly normal. what it did was recorded normal computers first and then played back that normal activity to the monitoring machines when it was actually doing the sabotage. >> tonight, at 8:00 eastern on communicators on c-span2. the senateay, commerce committee held a hearing to atreasure issues of andstic violence professional athletes. community members heard from representatives of the national league, major league baseball, the national basketball association and the national hockey league. from theatives players' associations, the labor organizations that represent professional athletes also testified. is 2:20

[captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] role. sports have played a huge role in the united states. thanksgivingk on millions were americans were probably paying more attention than their sets turkeys. it is part of our cultural deal. good one.is a icons inhave become america. i remember my at that time 10-year-old son had this

poster of ray nischke that took up half his room. it is then andy that is the way it is now. whether we like it or not, major as rolethletes serve models for our youth. generations of children have sportingwatching events with their parents. it is a family affair. traditions have been handed down from generation to the next. literally an amazing american phenomenon. kids wear the jerseys of favorite players. they have their popular voters and they collect their cards. which are not charged for i guess. guess. but it is an amazing figure. and it is one that we want to about. given this reality, i hope we howskip protest 86s about domestic violence is a larger societyial problem and not sports.o

we often get that. knownpymittee it is not most but this committee has complete and absolute jurisdiction oversight over all all levels. and we have exercised it with and we sports, the ncaa, are today doing through the of your presence. of course, it is a societyial problem and a grievous one and really fast in terms of public awareness and the coverage of it. as a nation we have a responsibility to collectively and aggressively address this terrible problem. do.ll you, we. but given the high profile of professional sports when a celebrity athlete is charged with committing a domestic violence it uniquely our society through

ways.cinating and because professional sports bestowedue benefits upon them by the public such as public funds for stadiums or from antitrust laws laws it is entirely pore for this to focus its attention on how professional sports leagues and their unions are problem of domestic violence within their ranks. at today's hearing i want to majorwhat the four professional sports leagues and their players' associations are doing to address this problem. finde really do want to out. i want to know if you are developing uniform policies that effectively and appropriately punish players who actst what are criminal against women and children. i want to learn