the charles murray books which means i'm a total nerd, i guess. he wrote the book about the columbian exposition, the chicago world's fare. i love that guy. i'm reading all his books right now. that's the one i'm reading. i recommend those books they are -- they're non-fiction but written in a fiction kind of way. >> governor, thanks so much jeb bush: i should have said the national review. >> yes. you blew it. jeb bush: thank you.

our road to the white house coverage continues next week with afoundsnnouncements those running for the race. dr. ben carson is launching on monday. we'll have it live on 10:00 a.m. eastern on c-span and tuesday we'll have live coverage of former arkansas governor mike huckabee. live tuesday at 11:00 a.m. eastern also on c-span. >> the new congressional directory is a handy guide to the 114th congress with color photos of every senator and house member. plus bio and contact information and twitter handles and district

maps and fold out of capitol hill and congressional committees and federal agencies and state governers. order your copy today. it's $13.95 plus shipping and handling at c-span.org. coming up next on c-span a new look at authoritiessation of military force against isis. with two members of congress. then president obama discussing freedom of the press with a group of foreign reporters. and later illinois congressman bobbie rush reacting to the police officers charged with the death of freddie gray. >> we have two congressman to talk about their study group. . mr. jones, let's start with you. what is the purpose -- what is this constitutional work study group? guest: the power to declare war

including the power of judging the costs of war is fully and exclusively in the legislature. we have no debates. the only time we have a debate is when they are asking for money, millions and millions of dollars to send overseas. mr. mcgovern and i have been outspoken about our constitutional response ability. before we send young men and women to get their lives -- that's why we wanted to put this study group together because we believe members of congress should have an opportunity once a month, bringing in speakers to try to educate our colleagues to feel more responsible for these young men and women who have given their lives host: what is the role of congress when it comes to declaring war or pursuing warfare? guest: we are supposed to have a role in declaring war.

we're supposed to have a role when the president commits troops to combat operations. war is a big deal. congress does not treated as a big deal. we debate authorization bills. we don't talk about what's going on in afghanistan or iraq or syria. we try to offer amendments and often times they are denied. we don't have the opportunity to debate these issues on the house floor. that is a great service to the men and women who serve in our armed forces. -- disservice to the men and women. you cannot have it both ways. you can't criticize the president for committing troops into another war in iraq and syria and then say but i don't want to do my job, i don't want to vote yes or no. it's too easy for congress to stand back and let it all happen.

if it goes bad coming you can seattle do it was going to go bad. if it goes good, i was with them all the way. we are trained to force our colleagues, forced the leadership to do what congress is supposed to do. host: you are saying that congress is reluctant to step up to take its constitutional duty. guest: walter and i had a resolution we brought to the floor last july. if u.s. troops were engaged in sustained military combat operations in iraq, we would have to come back and have a vote to authorize that. it passed with 370 votes, a huge bipartisan vote. everyone is on record saying we ought to engage in this issue. in august, we begin bombing in iraq every single day again. we are more and more engaged and we have boots on the ground and there is no end in sight.

we can get the committees of jurisdiction to bring a resolution to the floor. walter and i both have serious issues about what we are doing in the middle east right now. if you think it's a good idea, you vote yes. you cannot blame the white house. the president has done his job. he submitted an amuf to congress. congress is not doing what it's supposed to do. host: the president's amuf is too broad from your perspective. from a conservative's perspective, it is too narrow. guest: i think it is to brought. -- broad. put it on the floor and let's have a debate. those who don't want to have a time in, let's debate that.

i blame the speaker of the house -- the president did send to congress this new amuf that we have not had members -- we have not had any formal hearings. the hearings included other issues in addition to the president's request for a new amuf. we cannot get it to the floor. host: you are racing senior member of the armed services committee. this article this morning -- it says tom cole and adam schiff have sent a letter saying we need to have this debate. have you to sign on to this letter? guest: we sent a similar letter a few months ago. we have done this time and time again.

we are a bit tired of sending letters. one of the things we will probably do when we come back offer a privilege revolution -- resolution and try to force a debate and a vote on our involvement right now in iraq and syria. if i can make a quick point -- we are spending roughly $8 million a day. the american people and those who wear the uniform, we have a responsibility and obligation to have this debate. it makes no sense for this leadership of the house to not let us meet our constitutional responsibility. this study group could help educate our colleagues, bringing in people who know the

constitution to say you have a responsibility, bejewel responsibility -- mutual responsibility. host: let's put the numbers up on the screen. guest: not only do we not vote on whether or not to put our men and women in harm's way, we don't pay for it, either. these wars have cost us trillions of dollars. if you go to war, congress and the president ought to impose a war tax. right now, the only people that are sacrificing are the men and women serving in afghanistan and iraq. the rest of us don't have to pay for it. the american people don't want to paperwork, maybe don't go to war -- pay for war maybe don't go to war part we've made it so easy to get into these foreign entanglements. congress sits back and ignores this constitutional

responsibility, it's outrageous. we have done letters, done resolutions. we may use the privileged resolution to force a vote on this in the next few weeks. guest: we have done five-minute speeches. i've done one a week. you've talked about the waste and abuse. that's why jim and i feel so passionately about this. it's about the taxpayer -- host: are we still operating under the 2001 amuf right after 9/11? guest: absolutely.

the amufs we passed during the bush time -- the amufs from 2001 and 2003 is what obama is using now. he has his legal advisers, they say he has the authority to use the existing amufs. it's a new fight, it's a new world. we need a new plan. guest: it's 2015. we are relying on a amuf from 2001. it is ludicrous. we are fighting a different war in iraq then when we entered into thousand three. -- th when we entered inan ♪n when we entered into

thousand 2003. we should have a thorough debate on this issue. i'm skeptical of what we are doing right now. it ought to be tough to send american men and women into war. it has become too easy and i'm not sure that what we are doing in some of these involvements is for our security one bit. host: should the president have the free hand he currently has to wage the war? guest: the president has the authority but we have a war powers resolution. the constitution says what our response ability is. -- responsibility is. it is pretty clear -- the fact that they are using the

2001-2003 amuf to justify what they are doing now tells you they even recognize that. that's a long time ago. we ought to repeal those amufs. if you want to start another series of wars, they ought to have a new amuf. i don't believe we should start another series of wars. that's one of the reasons we have to have this debate. are there alternatives that are more effective? it reminds me of the dr. seuss book, cap and accurate we go over to clean up a mess, it gets bigger. -- cap in thet in the hat. host: it has cost over $2 million so far, the air attacks and bombings on isis. -- $2 billion so far.

guest: we have to deal with isis. the aren't evil group -- they are an evil group. we have to have a debate on the floor of the house. we continue to allow the president, who has the authority to continue this bombing, yet we say nothing about it. i blame the leadership of the house and senate for not allowing us to meet our constitutional responsibility. host: let's take some calls. walter jones and jim mcgovern. this is robert in georgia who is a democrat. caller: thank you. i can get to questions out in 30 seconds. can you tell me if you believe the special forces and intelligence were the most likely cause or ability for getting the people they wanted to get in al qaeda in

afghanistan? it was sold that we need to send troops and. -- in. for iraq, it was weapons of mass distraction. -- destruction. there was a boat held on that. we sent regular troops in there. you were talking as if you were proud of that vote. are you? guest: no, i was not proud of that book. it was one of them worst mistakes i've made. the administration was misleading, manipulating intelligence a lie about the iraq war. it doesn't do my heart any good but i show god that i regret my vote.

i will go to my grave regretting that vote, quite frankly. guest: you are right. we got osama bin laden with a well-trained group of special forces, navy seals got them in pakistan -- him in pakistan. we ought to go after the bad guys, but how you do it is something we ought to discuss. i would argue that our involvement in afghanistan all these years has been incredibly costly. we have put up one corrupt government after another. al qaeda is gone and now we are fighting the taliban and there is no end in sight. we were supposed to be out of afghanistan this year. we offered an amendment saying ok, we support the president come if we decide to stay beyond

2015, congress ought to vote to authorize that or not. we were denied by the congressional leadership to even offer that amendment. host: is you are leadership and support -- in support? guest: i think they are. the weight displaced work, whoever is in majority is in charge. -- way this place works, whoever is in majority is in charge. at the end of the day, congress says no, the answer is no. if congress has yes, the answer is yes. the majority, the people in charge have the responsibility of scheduling what goes on the floor. i know our democratic leader wants to have a boat and discussion on this -- vote and discussion on this. she is not in charge.

john boehner is. guest: jim mentioned afghanistan. i went to walter walter reed tuesday. i had these two little girls whose daddy was killed two years ago in afghanistan. his name was sergeant kevin balded. benjamin palmer was from cherry point, in my district. they were sent to afghanistan to train afghans to be policeman. the night before those two men were killed, kevin e-mailed his wife and says i don't trust them , i don't trust any of them. the next day, he and palmer were killed by the people they were trying to train. i had no idea that i was going to meet two of the four who were part of the group were a medic was shot in afghanistan and

killed by the people they were trying to help. we need to have this debate. the military deserves it and the american taxpayer deserves it. host: al in tampa, florida. caller: i'm a disabled vet. i've been waiting nine years, two months and five days for my v.a. claim. my concern is, you don't know where anybody stands anymore. republicans or democrats, even their speeches about these wars. at least you can go and look at the voting record. it's nice to see republicans and democrats talking about the same issues. i've given my service, i was not injured during the war. i was injured in an accident in the service. the problems with the v.a. and

not being treated -- host: thank you very much. guest: i would say quickly that al should call his member of congress. i have 7000 retired veterans in my district. they come first and they call our office response quickly. thank you for your service. -- they call and our office responds quickly. call and say i've waited so long, i need my benefits, i've earned them. guest: we are very grateful for your service. we owed them a debt of gratitude. that means making sure the healthcare services they are entitled to are available. we took up a v.a. appropriations bill that is underfunding rva

system -- our pa system. -- v.a. system. we are told we have a tough budget situation, we can't afford it. that is just wrong. host: have you seen improvements in the v.a. in the last year or two? guest: i have seen some improvements. there is more to do. the v.a. got the message. it's too bad we had to confront these issues by learning about this terrible scandal that occurred. idc changes in massachusetts -- i do see changes in massachusetts. host: joe. caller: good morning, peter. i'm 63. i wholeheartedly agree with both of these gentlemen, republican

and democrat. if you look back at what congress did when george bush was negotiating with saddam hussein to go and inspect him he told congress he needed the war power so that saddam knew he meant business. this congress did the most cowardly thing in its history and gave the power to declare war to the president, which is the most of noxious -- obnoxious thing i can imagine. no, they did not hold any hearings on that back then. i don't know why these gentlemen expect them to hold hearings on anything of substance after that. guest: we appreciate your comment and we certainly feel your frustration.

that's why we are putting together this group. that's why we're also putting our fellow members of congress on notice that we will use every procedural motion available to us to try to force this debate. if you go to work, there ought to be a clearly defined mission. -- if you go to war. no one can tell us how it ends. i can't figure out what our current mission is in afghanistan anymore. we need to exercise our proper constitutional role in oversight and providing authorization or not providing authorization. sitting back and letting all of this twiddling of thumbs is unconscionable. host: you may use a privileged resolution. how does that work? guest: this is jim's initiative. this really is getting to a point where it's about the only

option we have to force any discussion to put debate on the floor. jim would introduce it and i would join it. this is his idea. guest: we mentioned we took the vote last july, we introduced a privileged resolution saying invoking the war powers resolution enforcement an end to further escalation. we negotiated with the speaker about a less forceful resolution. if we are engaged in sustained combat operations, we will reconvene and vote on a formal amuf. that was in july. nothing has happened. we come back from our break and we will introduce the privileged resolution. it forces the vote on the floor. host: what makes a privileged? guest: there are procedures in

place that give us that ability to bring a resolution like this to the floor. unfortunately, you can't write the legislation you would like to write. it's about withdrawing our forces. we hope people will vote with us . to send a message to the leadership that you have to do something. if the majority in congress is saying no, it's no. if the majority say yes, it's yes. but being silent, that's moral cowardice. it really is. walter talks about the veterans that he has seen at walter reed. i've talked to veterans come i've been to funeral after funeral after funeral. to not even be actively engaged in the discussion about what we are doing is a sad commentary.

host: tom in harrisburg, pennsylvania. democrat. caller: he took a lot of fe heat -- guest: i voted for the afghanistan resolution because i thought it was appropriate to hold those responsible for 9/11 to account. what i did not expect was that resolution would be so broad in terms of its interpretation that we would still be in afghanistan , not fighting al qaeda, now fighting the taliban, god knows who else -- i voted against the iraq resolution as well because i thought that was a mistake. i'm glad i voted against it. the important point here

congress was on record on both afghanistan and iraq. we are not on record in this current war. host: robert in rochester michigan. independent line. caller: i would just like to say that i am very proud of both of these gentlemen for being sociable and giving -- getting along with each other, which is very rare for both parties. as far as all these wars, i don't know why are in the middle of everybody else's for. we have to keep the shipping channels clear. if we are going to be in the middle of everybody's work, they should be paying us instead of us paying to control everybody else's war.

there is no reason for us to be in the middle of every war. host: a response by walter jones. guest: i want to thank robert because that's exactly why jim and i are grateful to you to have us on this show today. we will be in afghanistan for nine more years. it's an agreement that obama signed with the new president of afghanistan. nine more years of life, limb and money. we have not even had a discussion on that. a nine-year agreement with a foreign country to have a troop presence and to help them rebuild their roads and streets when we cannot build our own roads and streets, spending billions of dollars every month that's why we are so frustrated. you hundred percent correct. -- you are 100% correct. host: is this different than the

congress being involved in the iranian negotiations? guest: the president should have the latitude to have ongoing negotiations. we do have a role. once they complete this agreement, congress should have the ability to analyze the agreement on behalf of the american people. i do think that we need to have an ongoing negotiation. both parties have a right to see what the agreement is. guest: what walter and i are talking about are instances where we are putting american servicemen and women in harm's way, directly involved in hostilities and combat operations. that is war. it is very clear that congress has a role in that.

even the executive acknowledges that. that's why the president keeps pointing to these amufs from a long time ago and why he's amid a new -- what he submitted a new amuf. when it comes to war, it's ironic because the iranian deal is not about us putting troops into harm's way. everyone feels congress ought to have a role, we ought to have a debate and approve this and prove that. yet, we have people in harms way right now. we are borrowing billions of dollars to fight these wars. where is everybody? why doesn't congress have a role in that? host: you are a member of the rules committee. could you explain briefly why that is such a powerful committee? guest: it is the traffic cop of

congress. every bill that comes to the house floor goes to the rules committee. we sometimes alter the text of the bill. we decide whether amendments can be offered. we keep the trains running, if you will. the rules committee -- i'm on the committee -- it's where we make the decision to say let's add these amendments, let's be able to debate whether or not we should continue to be in afghanistan or expand our military footprint in iraq. the leadership has been very insistent on saying no, we don't want these debates. i was told this is a defense bill. the are a lot of important matters in the defense bill. what can be more important than the fact that we have american men and women in harms way fighting a war?

that deserves debate. people can have differences of opinion. walter and i have some disagreements with the administration on their amuf. i respect them for putting their views on paper and presenting them. good people can differ and we ought to have those differences aired publicly and we ought to be on record as voting no or yes on these things. host: do you consider yourself an outlier on the republican party? guest: i am an independent. my first obligation is to my lord and savior. i think an obligation is to do what i believe my lord wants me to do. when walter jones goes to the floor, i don't know whether he will vote as a conservative, a populist or libertarian. i guess that is who i am. too many times, i see the

influence of money in policy in washington and that bothers me greatly. host: why did you vote against the budget? guest: i voted against the budget resolution because i think it is a shell game. it will not accomplish what they say it will accomplish in 10 years. they continue to use a gimmick type of system to say we will balance the budget. i don't think it is an honest budget to begin with. host: do you support the defense spending portion? guest: no. the problem is, it's like why we are here today. in these bills, they write the bills so they can get the votes of certain members. if they had not been able to get those on the committee by $94

billion in the slush fund, they probably would not have gotten the resolution passed. host: muriel in new haven connecticut on our democrats line. caller: hey, peter and walter and jim. i have to say this, on the issue of war and peace, i support peace 100%. here is the thing -- walter and jim represent what is really great and true americanism. they support our flag, they support our country and they know what war means to families their sons, their daughters, their husbands. a famous poet wrote "the poppies

grow amid the crosses row on row." wars do not solve anything. the only thing i want to say more than what i already said, if you support our flag, if you support our country, this issue of having a debate among our people that represent us is the most important thing to the republic. host: we will leave it there. guest: i appreciate her statement. i agree. i think it is a very american thing to have this debate. it's a very american thing to have to set. -- have dissent.

that's the way this country operates. in coffee shops all across the country, people talk about these things. if i want to go to a diner in worchester, people ask why we are still in afghanistan. they wonder why we are not having that debate in congress. congress is becoming a place where we debate tribute -- trivial as issues casually. we need to talk about this and we need to get it right and there are alternatives other than doing the same old same old. guest: she made some great points. why don't you in congress meet your constitutional responsibility? that's why we are here today. host: the work-study group, when

is the first meeting? will it be open to just members open to cameras, what is the plan? guest: we are working together with jim's office and we will have the first meeting at the end of may. i will be the first host. we will rotate every month. we want to bring in any one that would like to join us. we are trying to get enough members of congress, anywhere from 201125 that would come sit on a regular basis -- 20-25. we want experts on the constitution that can remind us that we have a duty based on our constitutional -- host: have other members joined the study group yet? guest: we have people calling in wanting to be part of it.

there are a lot of members of congress who are hungry to have discussions on these things. to talk about the alternatives or the procedures. they are hearing from their constituents as well, why are you so silent on this? why don't you do your job? this is an attempt to try to force us to do our job. we will look at privilege resolutions and procedures to force this debate. this debate might be for some it's a debate that has to happen. host: mark in clearwater, florida. republican. caller: good morning. thank you for letting america have their voice. on a bostonian, i'm familiar with mr. mcgovern's politics. if i recall, thousands of kurds

were killed with syrian guestas. there were two resolutions for war. we told them we were coming in what the we were landing them on and he moved them out before we got there. there were cameras on the beach. the republican independent stated that bush lied. i would like to know now, what information he has to prove that bush lied. that is the comment you made. guest: i have spent, ever since i voted for the amuf to go into iraq, i have met with people such as general anthony zinni who oversaw the iraq territory. he told me he was in constant

contact with you when inspector, going in every day to see what saddam hussein was doing. -- with a you and inspector. i've talked to people on the in before we went into iraq and they all said it was manufactured. -- with a youu.n. inspector. host: corey from vermont. independent line. caller: this is for congressman jones. i would like to know how far he has gotten with this bill on the 9/11 commission report declassified. when you was when what the bill is actually about -- would you explain what the bill is actually about? guest: we have read the 28 pages

that came from the 9/11 congressional inquiry. what we want to do -- president obama has promised the 9/11 families on two separate occasions that he would declassify the information to 9/11 families. mr. president, please keep your promise. bob graham was up here this week , i had a chance to talk with him, he has had in conversation with rand paul -- i asked rand paul yesterday to put the same resolution in on the house side. senator paul will talk to --

it's all about relationships. host: you were able to read them as a member of the armed services committee? guest: any member can read them. you have to ask permission of the intelligence committee and they would give you authorization. you go into a room and someone watches you read them. i read the 28 pages. the american people have the right to know the truth about who financed the 9/11 attack. guest: i was afraid to read classified pages because i was afraid i would repeat it. it seems to me that people ought to know what their government does and what the government does. it's our job to keep everything a big secret, people can't handle the truth -- people's

taxpayer dollars are funding this operation in washington. they ought to know what's going on. i'm all for letting sunshine in on what's going on. host: the war powers act passed in 1973. how will that take a role in your constitutional or study group is work-study group -- constitutional work-study group? guest: we will invite some constitutional scholars. we will talk about what our constitutional responsibilities are and why we are not meeting the right now. we will file a privileged resolution in conjunction with the war powers resolution which says the president has 60 days in which to come to congress and ask for our approval. we are not doing that.

either we disagree with the president -- he submitted an amuf. he has done his job. we had to wait for him to submit an amuf and he did. now, were told that we should not vote on anything, we ought to wait until the new congress comes in. we now have a new congress. we have exhausted that excuse. now, we're being told that we can't come together on it because there are too many differences. bring it to the floor. let us have this debate and let people vote their conscience. if you don't have the vote, you don't have the vote. you can't do things without the votes. to say, well, it's too complicated, too uncomfortable or to blame it on partisan

bickering -- walter is a conservative and i'm a liberal. we have a lot of differences. we have come together on this. this is not republicans versus democrats. it's about what we think is right and what is wrong. we are not the only republican and democrat below on this. you mentioned tom cole and adam schiff. there are lots of republicans democrats who feel as we do. host: any appetite for this in the senate? guest: it's going to be interesting -- that's why we appreciate this opportunity to meet with you today. we just sent the first letters out this week, asking our colleagues to consider joining us in this study group. we will see how this develops. i hope we will get a lot of energy from people who believe in the constitution, scholars

and not scholars and give us a bit of momentum with this effort. this is about our response ability -- response ability. host: senator kaine has been very vocal on this issue. all we are trained to do is to get this place, this congress to do its job. we could argue about every different positions. that's our different positions but right now, we are doing nothing. host: tom in clinton, maryland. democrat. caller: good morning. these wars have cost the american people so much. we had the marshall plan for germany.

our roads are coming apart. baltimore is an example of people in the inner-city that get nothing from the government. our money is going overseas to help other people. why aren't we spending money on our people to help them and we won't have all these shootings and riots? guest: i agree, totally. our nation's debt is $18.1 trillion. when bill clinton left office, it was $5.9 trillion. that's why we are sitting here today, so frustrated because we are finding all this money to send to these foreign countries afghanistan for nine more years so that they can build roads and schools and let the taliban blow them up while we can't fix our roads and schools in america. it's time for america to have this debate, time for congress

to reestablish the policies for this country. guest: we had a vote supporting this notion that every dollar we spend over here, we ought to spend a dollar over here. every dollar we spend on a road or bridge in afghanistan or iraq , spend at least a dollar here in the united states. if we did that, we would have created millions of jobs here and fixed all of our roads and bridges. it is frustrating when we have these budget debates and we are told, we don't have money for infrastructure here, we don't have money to rebuild schools or invest in revitalizing neighborhoods. when it comes to sending money overseas, whatever money we don't have, we borrow and nobody says anything. to those who are fiscal hawks out there, they ought to demand

that we pay for these wars or stop them. going to war on a credit card can no longer be an option. our country is paying the price. our constituents are saying, why are you helping us back home? we are told there is no money. that's not what we are being called when it comes to investing in these wars overseas. guest: general campbell, i asked him recently, would there ever be anyone in the military or administration to come to congress when congress is funding a nine year agreement with a country and ever come back to congress and say look, i think four years i cannot see any changes, let's stop it? we won't do it. we will probably be there nine years after nine years. this is our frustration. it's not fair to the american people. host: george in jacksonville,

florida on our public . -- on our republican line. caller: i would strongly suggest that we cut back to shock and all, pullout come up the christians and the moderate muslims out, send them to lebanon or other countries that will take them in and tell them we will be back if they attack us. there are six steps to islamic conquest. diplomacy, immigration -- host: if you could, go straight to your point. do you think our current policy set up with --

caller: 100,000 troops, four weeks, pullout. guest: i'm not sure i subscribe to his solution. we ought to have a debate on it and people ought to be able to express their views. lyndon johnson had this great line -- he said it is easy to get into work, hard to get out of one. it's been too easy for us to get into these wars and no one can tell me how this ends. the ultimate answer is, the people in iraq have to live with each other. you cannot bomb that into a reality. we need to think differently. otherwise, we are doing the same old same old. i don't think it has been worth it, quite frankly. host: kevin in manchester, new hampshire. democrat.

caller: i just want to say, as far as democrat-republican goes it doesn't make any sense anymore. no one is working together. used have -- you should have general wesley clark on there with you guys. he talks about the destabilization of other countries because they don't want to use our paper money because our paper money is in deep trouble right now. the federal reserve is a private organization -- every piece of dollar bill that comes across the bank has a debt attached to it. we are all working under debt. we pay our bills with debt, we're constantly in debt. we've had enough of your bickering. we could go over and stop this thing if we wanted to. there was a false flag attack to

put the pressure on the american people. i can start my own business. -- can't start my own business. the states have stepped in and they want to take money from me when i'm not a part of anything? guest: i agree with kevin on 90% of what he said. this country is in financial chaos. i believe sincerely -- $18.1 trillion in debt -- i believe we are headed toward a financial calamity if we don't start dealing with the out-of-control debt of this nation. you can start that by having a foreign policy that makes sense and has an end to it. guest: we are frustrated too

with the bickering and partisanship. we agree. host: how did this relationship form? guest: jim and i are strong together on home health care. a totally different issue. host: you were working together? guest: absolutely. we established a relationship, a friendship. it's through these relationships that you were less you have a lot more in common than you think. you don't have to agree on everything to agree on some things. when it comes to war congress ought to stand up and vote yes or no on it. people who are watching, call your members of congress and tell them to join our study group, to be part of this bipartisan effort to demand that congress do its job.

maybe we can change some things. host: the constitutional work-study group begins when? guest: it is being formed as we speak. we get members together and learn about what our options are. what are the different solutions to these difficult situations in the middle east? it is primarily organized to remind our fellow members of congress that we have a constitutional responsibility when it comes to war and peace and we are not living up to that response ability. host: a privileged resolution after the break next week.

she reported on military operations in the north region

we very much appreciate her being. we also have duk from vietnam. blogger who has written on human rights, including religious freedom, as a leading voice for later press freedom in vietnam. he spent six years in prison, and was just released in october. finally, we have lily, who is from ethiopia. she helped to shine a light on the outrage of child brides. after her advocate the for a free press, she was harassed and detained. now she is for the national endowment for democracy. i heard first-hand from all of them the importance that almost,

including the united states government speaking out on behalf of the values of freedom of the press. as i indicated to them, these are countries in which we are engaged. and do a lot of business. we think that engagement, diplomacy is absolutely critical to the national interest of the united states. but what is also important is that we speak out on behalf of the values that are enshrined in our incomes and bill of rights -- in our constitution and bill of rights, because we believe those are not simply american values. they are core values, like being evil to express yourself and your conscience without danger. -- being able to express herself. it is a human right, a universal right. and ultimately, makes the world better and stronger when individual conscience and a

press that is free is allowed to function. it is also a time for us to reflect and honor all of those journalists who were languishing in jail as we speak right now who are being harassed, who are in danger, and of course, journalists whose lives were lost. that includes steven sotloff james foley. those killed in paris at charlie hebdo. we will keep working for the release of journalists who are unjustly imprisoned, including jason of the washington post, who is currently being held in iraq. once again, i want to thank the three journalists who are here for sharing with me in very clear and this work terms --

very clear and stark terms they are facing. i want everyone to know this will continue to be a policy for united states, not only because it is the right thing to do, but it is in the interests of the united states. since it is world press reconvey, -- press freedom day i think i should take at least one question. before i answer your question, when we were discussing why i thought freedom of the press is so important, i used the example of selma, the incredible courage of those marchers across the bridge. i had noted there had not been good reporters like mr. bill plante at that bridge that day america's conscience might not

have been stored and we might not have seen the changes that needed to be made. that is just one example of why the free press is so important. the state's had literally just walked to the podium as i was coming here. -- state's attorney. i have not the chance to see the nature of the charges. i've been watching the press conference she engaged in. let me just say this -- building on what i said in the rose garden, it is absolutely vital that the truth comes out on what happened to mr. freddie gray. it is my practice not to comment on a legal process that is involved. that is not appropriate. but i can tell you that justice needed to be served. all the evidence needs to be presented.

those individuals who are charged, obviously are also entitled to due process and the rule of law. i want to make sure that our legal system runs the way that it should. do just that department and our new attorney general -- the justice apartment and our new attorney general is in communication with baltimore officials to make sure that any assistance that we can provide on investigation is provided. what i think the people of baltimore want more than anything else is the truth. that is what people around the country expect. to the extent that it is appropriate, this administration will help local officials get to the bottom of exactly what

happened. in the meantime, i am gratified that we have seen the constructive thoughtful protests that have been taking place. peaceful but clear calls for accountability that those have been managed over the last couple of days in a way that is ultimately positive for baltimore and of the country. i hope that approach to nonviolent protest and community engagement continues. and finally as i have said for the last year, we are going to continue to work with the task force that we put together post-ferguson. i am actually going to be talking to mayors who are interested in figuring ways to

help rebuild trust between the community and police, and to focus on some of the issues that were raised by the task force right after this meeting. our efforts to make sure that we are providing greater opportunity for young people in these communities -- all of those things are going to be continuing top priorities for the administration. i will have more announcement and news about that in the days and weeks to come. thank you very much everybody. have a great weekend. thank you. >> this weekend, the c-span city support has partnered with communications to learn about the history and literary life about topeka, kansas. >> when kansas signed, the act of signing that is a paper was viewed by missourians as an act

of war. when it northerners decided that it popular sovereignty will decide the fate of kansas, we're going to send people to settle. that was used as an act of war by many missourians who had just assumed this would all be theirs. they went back and forth across the kansas border almost immediately. in may of 1856, john brown, his sons, and a couple of other followers, dragged five men from their cabins along the pottawatomie creeks, and they were shot and hacked to death with broadsword. that effectively clear to that area of southern settlers. >> here into beg topeka, you would be hard-pressed to find out whether white or african-american students attended. because of the school board really did provide the same materials that the white schools offered. what is even more interesting

for most people when they come to visit when they find after graduating from elementary school, african-american students attended integrated middle and high schools. while they certainly were no supporters of segregation and obviously saw the injustice of having to attend separate elementary schools, the african-american community also was very proud of their schools. these were excellent facilities. so while there was support the ideal of integration, there was also some resistance, especially from the teachers and the local chapter of the naacp, who feared the loss of these fusioninstitutions and jobs. >> the new congressional

directory is a handy guide to the 114th congress, with color photos of every senator and house number. with bio and contact information and twitter handles. a foldout map of capitol hill, and eight look at congressional committees, the president's cabinet. order your copy today. it is $13.95 through the c-span online store at the span.org. -- cspan.org. >> little encouragement bobby rush called the decision to charge six police officers "courageous" and a turning in holding police accountable. he spoke from the housework shortly after the announcement was made after state attorney marilyn mosby. this is 20 minutes. >> the chair recognizes the gentleman from illinois, mr. rush for 30 minutes.

bobby rush: i want to thank you mr. speaker. within the last hour or so there was a decision by the baltimore city state attorney marilyn mosby in the investigation of the death of f reddie gray. a black man who died under questionable moral circumstances. circumstances that kind of made us all wonder where the truth

lied. circumstances that cause young people of colors to take to the streets across this nation. circumstances that brought into a sharp, bright light, the question of justice in america the question of his misconduct in america. -- police misconduct in america. the question of poverty in america. the question of violence in

america. freddie gray's murder freddie g ray's death, and the questionable circumstances around his death, brought into sharp relief all of these issues of race and living in an urban center. it brought into sharp relief, mr. speaker, 50 years or more of abject determined callous miss investment in our urban areas. -- misinvestment. 50 years or more of joblessness thatbad schools, bad

housing, bad healthcare. 50 years of hopelessness. for in the last few minutes, mr. speaker, this brilliant young courageous african-american woman, baltimore city state's attorney marilyn mosby made a decision that she decided that yes, we are settling differences of opinion to change stories. notwithstanding all of these things that are happening, that she decided tahthat freddie gray

was murdered. freddie gray was murdered. and that she would indict the police officers who were responsible. and by indicting the baltimore city police officers who were responsible for mr. gray's mur der, she made a giant enormous step for justice, for young people, young african-american men and women, young people who live in our urban areas. by her decision today just a

few moments ago she has done this nation and invaluable service. especially for young people. especially for the african-american and other minority youth. these young people have fought decades now sought and yearned for justice as it relates to police misconduct, police brutality, and yes police murder. 's news -- this news stands for justice. it is a standard that now transcends baltimore transcends

the entire state of maryland, it transcends and it reaches two other points all across this nation. -- to other points. ferguson, new york city, chicago, cleveland, other places all throughout this country. mr. speaker as an african-american male who represents the south side of the city of chicago i know firsthand about police misconduct, these may have -- piolice mayhem and police murder. i must say, mr. speaker, that in

my state years -- in my 68 years living mostly in the city of chicago, i have never seen the wheels of justice move so profoundly so poignantly, and so purposefully as i have witnessed with baltimore city state's attorney marilyn mosby's actions. she has raised all kinds of standards. all of us who fight for justice who want to see justice delivered in the true american

way, who want to see an end to all of the machinations and excuses and turning away, closing our eyes to police misconduct in our urban areas. this wonderful courageous young city state's attorney has raised the standard for prosecutors all across our great nation. she has raised the standards for chief of police and other law enforcement officials.

she has raised the standard for even in those who are in this body. open your minds, open your eyes and see the truth. let me just say right now mr. speaker, that the police officers of this nation, the overwhelming majority of them are good, hard-working defendant of the community. they are not lawbreakers. they are there to serve and protect. and we honor them, and we lift them up. but there are a few who think that they can run away with all kinds of illegal actions just because they can get away with it.

because the system has a tendency and a habit of rising to protect even those who violate not only the laws of this nation, but the spirit of the laws of this nation. the laws that keep this nation together. these laws that make us have an identity as one nation under god indivisible with liberty and justice arefor all. these police officers, this minority of those on the urban police forces, forces us of this nation, these are the ones that

aggravate the constitution. they are short serving those for the thrill of the moment. can you imagine, mr. speaker me handcuffed and legcuffed, laying down face down in the back of a patty wagon? the police officers who were

driving, who had been in custody, to maim, harm, brutalize him. you're in the back of a patty wagon, handcuffed, legcuffed and these police officers, three of them are jostling you around in a steel-encased patty wagon.

not caring about the broken parts of your body that might occur. not caring about whether you really live or die. not even caring about the oath that they were sworn when they were hired. and when they took that the to serve and protect all of those names became secondary. seeing how much havoc and harm they can cause to this black man in baltimore. yeah, they thought they would get away with it. that no one would even think to

question their decisions their way of thinking, their conduct, but thank god, there is a woman in baltimore who said to them, to all of the police officers who are like-minded such as them to this nation, no more. no more! not this time. you were going to be indicted, and you were going to be charged. and that is the way it is.

mr. gray's mother, his father, his relatives, his loved one, he is friends, his neighbors, can sleep safe knowing that there will be justice for freddie gray. i said in chicago, there will be justice for freddie gray. from this nation's mourners young people are rejoicing now that there is soon to be justice for freddie gray. mr. speaker ms. mosby's

actions, her courage, her dedication, her commitment, her decisiveness has spoke to the idea that creating this movement for justice all across this nation. she has very clearly in the profoundly, and without hesitation -- and profoundly, and without hesitation showed it to all of us, to this nation. her actions have shouted it out that black lives do matter, that black lives do matter.

that all lives in america matter, and that black lives matter also. thank you mr. speaker, and i yield back the balance of my time. >> some of my thoughts on the news today out of baltimore. on her facebook page, joanne writes -- and tom says -- you can post a comment and see what others are saying by going to hisfacebook.com/c-span. on the next washington journal of look at the rights and protest in baltimore, and how the death of freddy great brought attention -- freddie gray brought attention to issues

of social justice. smith college economics professor on the nfl's recent decision to voluntarily give up its tax exempt status. we are looking for your phone calls and comments via facebook and twitter. washington journal -- live every day at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. announcer: c-span is pleased to present the winners of the student can annual competition, that encourages middle and high school students to think critically about issues that affect the nation. students were asked to create documentaries on the theme, the three branches and you.

this year, our grand prize winners are and a gilligan, katie demos, and michael l ozovoy. their entry focused on minimum wage. >> the federal government created the minimum wage in 1938 at the height of the great depression. it was designed to keep america's workers out of poverty and increase consumer purchasing power in order to stimulate the deme. >> it's been increased 22 times in order to keep up with inflation. including seven times in the past 25 years. >> some say it's time to do it again. but is that really in the best interest of our community? >> sydney jones is a single mother with a 4-year-old child. she has to make tough choices every week since she has to make ends meet on a minimum wage job. $7.25 an hour.

she says $15,080 isn't enough for her to get by. >> it is hard to sometimes have to decide if my son needs underwear, i'm going to have to be late on a bill, to buy him a pack of underwear, or i'm going to have to ask people to borrow money. it is hard sometimes. >> sydney is not alone. according to the bureau of labor statistics, 3.3 million americans make had minimum wage or below. that's 2.6% of all u.s. workers. most minimum wage workers are employed in fields like food service, retail sales or personal care such as daycare. rose marie makes minimum wage as a custodian. >> we pay our bills and pay for our housing and stuff like that. we can't do that on minimum wage. just can't. we have all these programs things like food stamps.

why do you need food stamps? because you got to eat. you don't make enough to feed yourself and pay all your bills. you just don't. >> the push is on to raise the federal minimum wage from $7.25 an hour to maybe $10.10 an hour which would provide a little over $21,000 a year if the individual works 40 hours per week. it's been six years since the minimum wage was raised. some in congress say now is the time to raise it again. >> but things are getting better. the problem is they're only getting better for some. we know that corporate profits have continued to break records while americans are working harder and getting paid less. >> but some like kentucky congressman andy barr say raising the minimum wage will cost jobs. citing a nonpartisan study by the congressional budget office. >> if we mandate a higher

minimum wage in those entry level jobs, that we would lose 500,000 to a million jobs immediately. those low-income jobs. that's the last thing we want. we don't want to create more unemployment. we want higher employment. >> representative barr says more education and better worker training are the keys to improving the lives of minimum wage workers. like sydney and rosemarie. not an artificial wage. >> what we need to focus on again is policies that produce economic growth so that workers in minimum wage jobs move into higher wage jobs, that would then open up those jobs for new workers to come in who are currently unemployed, to fill those -- to back those minimum wage jobs and move up the ladder of success that way. >> many business owners agree. mark started quantum metals, a scrap metal company, 20 years ago. today it has $120 million in annual sales.

employing a staff of 50. he believes a wage hike hurts his bottom line. forcing companies to raise prices. >> mandating a higher wage will raise costs and force them to raise their prices in the marketplace. >> vice president joe biden says increasing the minimum wage will help all workers earn more and spend more. >> folks, it's long past due to increase the minimum wage. that will lift millions of hardworking families out of poverty. and in the process, produce a ripple effect that boosts wages for middle class and spurs economic growth for the united states of america. >> and some minimum wage workers say that extra money will make them less dependent on government benefits. saving taxpayers millions of dollars. >> the city helped me get my apartment.

they paid the first month and they paid the deposit. but they're broke because everybody's needing money so bad to help them out. but they don't have any more money. this was my opportunity to get on my own but if i had my own money, i could have paid the deposit and the first month and last month or whatever. like normal. but i couldn't because of the situation i was in. >> even some minimum wage workers believe had mandating a pay hike will cost them and everyone else. in the long run. >> if you raise the minimum wage, everything else has to go up as well. it said the government of $10.10. [inaudible] employees have to pay more money, therefore they have to raise their product prices up. in the long run it hurts us more and it also makes our money

worth even less than it is now. >> minimum wage jobs should be considered entry level jobs. >> congress should not mandate higher wages. rather invest in programs that help workers advance to higher skilled and higher paying jobs. >> these actions would benefit our community because more people making more money would create more tax revenue for government. which would result in people being able to invest more in positive community changes. >> to watch all of the winning videos and to learn more about our competition, go to cspan.org and click on student cam. also, tell us what you think about the issue these students addressed in their documentary on facebook and twitter.

[captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] announcer: new jersey governor chris christie spoke at a leadership breakfast. he also talked about entitlements and tax policy, and he took questions. this is 50 minutes. [applause] governor christie: thank you. thank you all very much. thank you. gary announced that i gave him permission to go off script, i turned to congresswoman -- to the congresswoman and said, who am i to tell people not to go off script?

can't be a hypocrite up here. so thank you all for inviting me. i'm happy to be back and i want to thank bobby kilberg and all the people here at nvtc for giving me the chance to come back and talk about issues that are facing our country right now and get the time to take some of your questions, which i enjoy doing the most. let's start with the group of folks i'm in front of this morning and this region. this is obviously an extraordinarily important region in our country's future. the technology industry here has provided an extraordinary amount of economic growth and jobs, great innovation for our citizens, and extraordinary promise for the future if -- if -- we decide to get our country

moving in the right direction, do the things we need to do. this region, of course, over time, has become completely interwoven with the government. we understand that. but we also know that there has to be continued, really robust growth of the private sector to make sure that we don't have any region this or any other one become completely dependent upon government for your economic growth, your economic vitality. it needs to be a partnership and a partnership that works, but that partnership is driven best when it's the private sector driving growth, driving innovation and then can offer that innovation and those ideas to government as a way to improve the services that government provides. to the folks that we serve each and every day. and so i would urge you to continue to push the government to do the things we all know commonsense dictates, but that all too often are left by the side of the road in the

political carping and sniping that goes on most particularly in our nation's capital but -- capitol but every once in a while in state capitols as well, like mine. i met one gentleman this morning who has a business in new jersey and told me that he was a beneficiary of some of the tax incentive and tax credit programs that we put into place and he told me that it literally saved his company and that they're now growing and they're hiring and that's the kind of partnership i'm talking about. a partnership that frees up your ideas and your hard work to be able to succeed through the initial challenging times, to be able to grow and expand and that helps every person in new jersey, not only the ones who wind up working there but also the broader community that benefits from that company's involvement in the community philanthropic activity, and the

money that they provide in salary and benefits helps to strengthen the fabric of our state and its people. by making them feel good when they come home at night from a good-paying job that brings meaning to their lives. to be able to provide for their spouse and for their children. and to be able to, for them also to be an active, involved member of the community. all of this is interconnected. and there are times that i grow frustrated about the fact that many leaders in government don't see the obvious things that need to be done in order to take advantage of the extraordinary resources we have in this country, most particularly our human resources. to be able to make our country grow and be a better, more prosperous place. i saw this in new jersey firsthand through the type of policies that we now have seen in washington over the last six years.

between 2000 and 2009 in new jersey, we raised taxes and fees at the state level alone 115 times. 115 times. and what were the results of that policy? also we grew spending by 56% at the state level. over those eight years. what happened as a result? new jersey had a jobless decade. that period of time we grew net zero private sector jobs. and that was during a period of time in that eight years when we did have national growth. coming out of 9/11, prior to the recession of 2008. yet new jersey did not benefit from any of that. why didn't we benefit? because we put in policies at the state level that raised

taxes, that increased spending that extended regulations, to all these new areas and that made new jersey a place that became more expensive to do business, more onerous to do business and as a result people voted and they voted with their feet. businesses left. or just decided they didn't want to take the risk that went along with growing a business in that type of environment. that's why in the five years now since we came into office, we've grown 175,000 new private sector jobs. now some people may say, well that's good but not great. i'd like to do better too. but in light of the fact that we had nearly 10 years of zero private sector job growth, we're fairly happy with the fact that we, our policies have been able to push that forward. how have we done it? first of all, we've done it by reducing government spending

significantly. in our state. think about this. in the budget i just proposed for fiscal year 2016, which will be adopted at the end of next month, discretionary spending, which means spending on everything in state government other than pensions, health care and debt service, is $2.5 billion less than it was eight years ago. not $2.5 billion less on the projection, not like they do it in washington. and then call it a cut. this is actually less spending $2.5 billion in less spending at the state level. how do you do that? well, we have 8,500 fewer employees today than the day i became governor and we did it without any layoffs. all through attrition and being able to then make government become more efficient and more effective. you want to reduce spending, the first place you have to start is reducing the payroll, the size of government. we put in $2.3 billion in business tax cuts and tax

incentives. that has helped to spur growth in our state and how folks who were already there not only want to stay, but want to grow as well. it's been extraordinarily important to our economy. as we mentioned, did a number of other things in the tax realm but what we need to do on the national level is what we're continuing to do on the state level in terms of entitlements. i spoke a couple of weeks ago at st. anselm's in new hampshire about a vision for entitlement reform. and the fact is, we need to tell some truth to people. i've been talk about this since 2011. 71% of federal government spending is now on entitlement programs. 71%. to give you some perspective on the growth of that, when john kennedy was elected president in 1960, entitlement spending was

26% of the federal budget. it is now 71%. so you'll have lots of people who come before you i'm sure over the next number of months who want to talk to you, and i will briefly this morning, about national defense and about education, about research and development, national institutes of health, things that we need to invest in to make our country continue to be a cutting edge leader around the world. but if they to not first talk to you about how they're going to reform entitlements, with all due respect you should just eat your breakfast not pay any attention. [laughter] because the fact is, if you don't get that 71% under control, where are you getting the money to be able to do those other things we need to do? and no one likes to talk about this. nasty business. talking about raising the social security retirement age two

years over the next 25 years. brutal. absolutely brutal. talking about doing the same thing for medicare eligibility. two years over the next 25 years. fact is, though, we need to do these things. and why? not only here to bring you bad news this morning. i'm here to bring you good news. you're all living longer. congratulations. [applause] and not only are you living longer, but you're living better. we're living better, longer into our lives. medical innovation pharmacological innovation has allowed us to have a longer, better quality of life. this is something to be celebrated. the average age now of a woman in this country, mortality age is 83. average for a man is 79. when these programs were

developed, by the way, i heard some of the women chuckling out there, but you should know, you should know that in the last decade, we're catching up. we're down four years now. we were down six years before. we're coming. [laughter] laugh now. but these programs were developed when mortality was in the 60's for both men and women. so we're living 15 to 20 years longer and expecting these systems to continue to support us through that length of time. the other thing i talked about i think is commonsensical as well. we need to have more means testing of medicare. social security.

the idea of social security is to make sure that none of our elderly grow old in their lives in poverty. if there's somebody making $200,000 a year in retirement income, retirement income, d o they really need their social security check? you know, everybody in this room knows if you're getting $200,000 a year in retirement income, you've got at least $4 million or $5 million socked away to throw off that kind of money and probably more. that social security check is that making the difference? in the quality of your life? the same way it would make a difference in the quality of life of a person who is living from social security check to social security check to pay their rent, to buy their food? now, i have people say to me, i paid into the system, i deserve to get it back out. i'm entitled. hence the names of the programs. there's lots of things, you know that we pay for that we get nothing back for in return except a sense of security.

i pay homeowners insurance. i'm sure you do too. we pay it every year. because in case our house burns down, we want to be able to rebuild our house. if you live there for 20 years 30 years, paying homeowners insurance every month and then you go to sell the house, do you go back to the insurance company and say, hey, by the way looking good, right? no problems. house didn't burn down. i'd like that money back. if you don't mind. this is meant to ensure that people did not grow old in poverty. you know, i was talking to my friend, mark zuckerberg, about this entitlement reform idea and he said, what, chris, do you mean by entitlement reform. i said, mark, if i have my way it means you get nothing. the fact is, i think most people who have been extraordinarily successful in america will understand this. that we need to make choices in this country.

you'll notice i just talked about means testing social security and medicare. i talked about raising retirement age. and i have not been vaporized into the stage. this idea that this is the third rail of american politics and you can't talk about it has, as its underlying premise, that people in my business don't trust the american people enough to tell them the truth. that may be true, that there's lots of people in politics who don't trust the american people enough to tell them the truth. i do. i absolutely believe that not only should we, but we must, because we want this country to be the kind of place we need it to be for our children and our grandchildren. we better start addressing this. i do not want to be a member of the first generation in this country's history to leave the next generation a weaker poorer, less opportunity-filled

country. because we can't let go of the idea that we get everything we want. that's not the way you run your businesses. and it's not the way your government should run this country. [applause] let me tell you, we have lots of ways that that money could be utilized. to help make this country grander, stronger, better than we are today. we need to reform this tax system both at the individual and the corporate level, it is onerous, it is onerous compared to almost any system around the world, and we need to get to that and get to it right away. second thing we need to do is reinvest in our national defense. the united states now, because of the conduct in my view of foreign and defense policy by this administration, can no

longer be counted on by our allies and is no longer feared by our adversaries. that's 0-2, everybody. you have to be able to do both of those things and we're doing neither. allies around the world are running from us. and pursuing their own course. adversaries are showing new aggression everywhere. iran, not only on their own, but through their sponsorship of hezbollah and hamas and other terrorist organizations. our inaction in syria has led to an exacerbation of the conduct of isis not only in the middle east but in europe and coming to a theater near you soon if we're not careful. mr. putin in russia, at least in my mind is clearly trying to put the old band back together. he's working and moving his way crimea, ukraine, and if you're

living in one of the baltic states today, members of nato, if you really believe that that membership is a full membership or a junior membership? the conduct of our country has them nervous. has democracies like poland nervous. our allies are concerned. and our adversaries are emboldened. the only way for us to turn that around is not only through a more robust and a more direct and more honest foreign policy where we draw lines and mean it. not say never mind when it gets a little difficult. and where we invest in a national defense that once again prevents conflict. we don't invest in national defense to have conflict. we invest in national defense to prevent conflict. but we should be investing in research and development and in

new ways to lengthen our lives and improve the quality of our lives. but none of these things are possible to approve science and technology and engineering and math education for all of our children. but none of those things are possible. if we don't get our house in order. i've seen this in new jersey -- we're the canary in the coal mine, everybody. the mistakes that have been made over the past decades in new jersey take a lot of effort to try to fix. we don't want to place our country in the same position. and so, i come to you this morning to let you know that the reason i'm telling you this is because if you all don't get it and start to fight for it, we have no hope. the people who are leading this technological revolution in this country, the thinkers, the doers, have to also be the leaders. it can't just be men and women

in my business. it has to be men and women in yours. don't fall victim to the conventional wisdom that says, something is not politically popular we shouldn't talk about it. because i don't want to be in old age and i don't think you do either looking back on the missed opportunities that litter our lives, rather than the fights we took on that were necessary to fight. so the message i bring to you this morning is born of the hard work of trying to dig a state that had been in awful difficulty out of it and from having traveled the country over the last year, 106,000 miles, to 37 different states, that is wracked with anxiety and that anxiety is not just economic anxiety, it's the anxiety that comes along with watching a government that's not doing its job. we need to start doing our job again.

that's what you pay us for. that's what we need to get done. i'm going to stop because i want to take your questions more than i want to hear myself talk anymore. [applause] >> thank you, governor, for your candor and vision and being here with us this morning. we can take a few questions from the audience. if you have a question, please proceed to one of the two microphones in the center of the room. be prepared to identify yourself by your name and company affiliation and consistent with normal practice at the nvtc, this is for people in business it is not open to members of the media. you can listen, but not ask. so first question. i'm going to ask the first question, unless i see somebody, which i do not. governor.

i have a question. you've talked -- there's -- you've talked about cutting entitlement spending because mathematically it's definitely something we must do. i think it's pretty clear you're not going to raise taxes. so you have taxes, spending, the only third area is economic growth. what will you do for economic growth? governor christie: i think the only way we solve our long-term debt problem is through economic growth combined with the type of restriction of spending i talked about. you're not going to be able to fix an $18 trillion problem with just one or the other. and this is a place where i differ significantly from the president. the president believes that he should be the one deciding who the winners and losers are. the government should decide. and that if you're a winner, he'll make money from you and give it to people he'd rather

have do a little bit better. that's never where -- that's never the way the country succeeded. the way to get economic growth and i'll have more to say about this next week is to fix the tax system. the tax system is now a clear disincentive to growth. we have seen it all over this country. the president has taken victory lap for 2% or 2.5% g.d.p. growth. it's the weakest recovery from a recession in modern times. and the jobs that have been created have not been the type of really good-paying jobs we saw created in the 1980's and 1990's. they are now jobs that are predominantly at the lower end of the wage scale and many of them because of obamacare and other factors aren't even full-time jobs. the way to expand growth is to get a tax system that encourages people to repatriate money back to the united states, lower taxes, the president thinks the way to stop corporate inversions is to pass a law against corporate inversions.

he wants to treat the system rather than the disease. let's change the tax system so that no c.e.o. feels it's their fiduciary duty to their shareholders to engage in corporate inversion to maximize the value of their shares so the united states. those are the first steps. >> thank you. >> govern christie, todd soudermire. innovation has been a real friend to the technology industry. could you talk about your views on immigration reform? governor christie: sure. i think the way to start this conversation in the country is to see if we can agree on two basic facts. fact number one is that people who are here in an undocumented status are not going to self-deport. so let's start with that. they're not leaving on their own.