this for terrain. italy problem is, -- the only problem >> we'll leave this discussion at this point as the u.s. house is about it gavel in for general speeches today. legislative work will get under way at 4:00 eastern. five bills on the agenda, including one to block new definitions of u.s. waters subjected to federal regulation. this is live coverage of the house here on c-span. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the chair lays before the house a communication. the clerk: the speaker's room, washington d.c., may 12, 2015. i hereby appoint the honorable steve womack to act as speaker pro tempore on this day. signed, john a. boehner, speaker of the house of representatives. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the order of the house of january 6, 2015, the chair will now recognize members from lists submitted by the majority and minority leaders for morning hour debate. the chair will alternate recognition between the parties with each party limited to one hour and each member other than

the majority and minority leaders and the minority whip limited to five minutes, but in no event shall debate continue beyond 1:50 p.m. . mr. jones: last week when we were in recess i traveled to my district and had the opportunity to appear on local television and to speak at civic clubs. every time i mentioned that we have an $18 trillion debt eastern north carolinians were astounded and could not believe it. to put the debt in perfect perspective, on january 20, 2009, the total debt stood at $10.6 trillion. as of last friday, may 8 2015, it has risen to $18.2 trillion. an increase of $7.5 trillion. i did an estimate over $200,000 for every full-time private

sector worker. i agree with my constituents that it is time for congress to stop passing legislation that is not paid for. republicans have control of both chambers of congress now because voters want us to cut the debt and deficit and stop passing legislation that is not paid for. in an april article of forbes magazine, stan wrote, and i quote, if you haven't noticed that congress is about to increase the federal deficit substantially, you haven't been watching carefully or at all. virtually every policy change that has already or soon will be considered seriously in the house and senate will make the deficit higher rather than lower. he further writes, and i quote, based on what congress is now considering, the deficit could be $100 billion or more next year than otherwise would it be if you just put washington on autopilot. that is if you made no changes

to existing tax and spending policies, that would be almost 21% increase it's obvious that our current fiscal policies are unsustainable. mr. speaker, i have been speaking for months and years about the waste of money in afghanistan. and it is sad to me that we have been pouring money down a rat hole known as afghanistan. we spent over $685 billion in afghanistan in the last 14 years. and president obama just entered into a bilateral security agreement with afghanistan late last year that ties us, our nation, to a failed policy for another nine years. what have we gained there with over 2,000 american troops killed over 20,000 wounded, and billions of dollars spent? my answer to my own question is nothing. absolutely nothing. a couple weeks ago i visited walter reed army medical center

to meet some our veterans who have been wounded and trying to heal. some have wounds that will never truly heal. congress owes it to them and all of our men and women who serve and the american taxpayer to have a serious debate about our future in afghanistan. i think it is high time to leave afghanistan. nine more years is absolutely fruitless. mr. speaker, out of fairness to the american taxpayer and future generations, we can no longer delay the need to put -- pay down our debt and work toward a sound economic policies. and i -- in fairness to our veterans and the men and women who serve in the military, we need to have a serious debate about whether spending more money and time in afghanistan -- mr. speaker afghanistan has been proven and it's well-known by historians, the graveyard of empires, is it worth it, mr. speaker? i think not.

may god continue to bless our men and women in uniform. and may god continue to bless america. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from oregon, mr. defazio, for five minutes. mr. defazio: as i rise on the floor of the house, the senate's about to begin debate on trade promotion authority. that is congress ceding all authority to the president to negotiate agreements secretly, bring them before these bodies, take it or lead it, no amendments. ceding our constitutional authority. i hope the senate turns him down. now, the president went to oregon last week to nike who originated the idea of chasing cheap labor around the world and outsourcing u.s. production. and he gave a speech.

i wasn't invited. that was fine with me. and he went there to make fun of people like me who have fought these trade agreements for more than 20 years. and been more right than wrong about the impact of these trade agreements. he talked about labor. don't worry. this is going to put enforceable labor provisions on vietnam where you can't have a union, where you have child labor prison labor, and you get paid 60 cents an hour. he says we are going to fix all that. well, i have read that chapter. i can't talk about it. it's classified. but i can say this. it will be as effective in dealing with the abuses, brunei is worse than vietnam, in brunei or vietnam, in terms of their labor, and working conditions, as the recent u.s. colombia free trade agreement. guess what? in colombia they still keep people, kill people who try to form unions. we have no recourse against them. it is not going to fix that problem. he says, i was in law school

when nafta past and these people are living in the past. unfortunately, you are bringing the past to the future. this agreement has been vetted by 500 corporations, real time. they can put it on a big screen in their boardroom, bring in their lawyers and staff and say let's change these words, let's make it look like the labor stuff is enforceable, then we put this here and it isn't. i can read it, too. i can go to the basement of this building and i can read it in secret and i can't talk about it. so this is an agreement that's for labor, for the environment, for consumers when it's being written in corporate board rooms and submitted to the special trade representative who puts that text into a secret agreement we can't see? no, the president is very, very wrong about that. he says, we are wrong because we are making things up about undermining regulation. food safety, worker safety, even financial regulations. well we are not. this has something called investor safe dispute resolution.

which means anyone can challenge any u.s. law. any foreign corporation, japanese corporation, or brunet and corporation, can challenge as you us law in a secret tribunal staff by lawyers who have no conflict of interest, no legal body underlaying their decisions, who one day represent corporations and next day senate judges. he's right. they can't make us repeal our laws. you're absolutely. he's absolutely right. but they can make us pay to keep them. we had to pay hundreds of millions of dollars to brazil to keep subsidizing cotton in this country. i wasn't into subsidizing the cotton, but it i. me we were subsidizing it here because of the power of the farm lobby, we paid brazil hundreds of millions of dollars to keep that subsdy. the japanese were killing dolphins to catch tuna. we passed a law to just label dolphin safe tuna so consumers could decide. we had a friendly campaign. the mexicans won in the same process. they won a judgment against the united states of america.

that was an unfair trade barrier. you have to pay the mexicans to not fish on dolphins. they appeal to another place and they actually made us eliminate dolphin safe all together. yes, they can undermine our labor laws. it can undermine our environmental laws. and it can undermine our consumer protection laws. when they are challenged by a foreign corporation. so the president is yet wrong again. we are not making tough up. currency manipulation. the japanese wall. every u.s. auto manufacturer knows about this. they -- they manipulate their curncy. therefore their vehiclesrd 8,000 cheaper than they would be if their currency was fairly traded. $8,000 we are going to compete on a level playing field? this agreement gives full access with no tir riffs to our pickup truck market which means the end of pickup truck manufacturing in america. they are gone with an $8,000 advantage. we can't put currency manipulation into this and say that's not fair because the

japanese didn't want it. but they are giving us a big concession. they are going to buy some american rice. isn't that great? we are trading thousands, tens of thousands of auto jobs for a few jobs working in the rice field in california. that will only last until the japanese challenge the rice farmers because they get subsidized federal water. they will ultimately be barred from the japanese market because they'll lose in a secret tribunal under this provision. the so finally i've just got to wonder what the president's talking about when he says we are speculating. it's made up. mexican trucks. i predicted when we had the agreement with mexico they would force us to let mexican trucks ride freely in america. guess what? we lost that and they put tariffs on our goods because they couldn't drive our trucks around the country. there is great precedent here. he hasn't fix add darn thing. he probably hasn't even read the agreement. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the chair recognizes the gentlelady from illinois ms. schakowsky, for five minutes.

ms. schakowsky: mr. speaker i rise today to recognize women's health week and national nurses week. yes, this week is women's health week. a time to raise awareness about manageable steps women can take to improve their health. currently, one in five women is in fair or poor health. and almost 40% report struggling with mental health issues. women are less likely than men to be employed full-time. meaning they are less likely to be eligible for employer-based health benefits. difficulty finding and maintaining employer-based coverage is specially pronounced for older women who are more likely to develop conditions like breast cancer. but thanks to obamacare, women's health took a monumental step forward. before obamacare, insurance companies could discriminate against women, could deny coverage to women, of course to

all people, due to pre-existing conditions such as cancer and even previous pregnancies. today becoming a woman or pregnant is no longer a pre-existing condition. the national women's law center estimates that insurers' practice of gender rating cost women about $1 billion a year before obamacare. obamacare ends gender rating. it requires health plans to cover women's preventive services like contraceptive gare and obgyn without cost sharing. accessible contraceptive coverage is particularly important because prior to obamacare more than half of all women between the ages of 18 and 34 struggled to afford it. in addition, every health insurance plan is now required to offer maternity leave. prior to the passage of obamacare, the national women's law center found that only 12% of private plans included maternity service.

and even without those major improvements, health care accessibility remains a challenge. almost one out of three women reports not visiting a doctor due to the cost. women are still less likely to be insured than men. even when they have insurance, women face increasingly high deductibles, co-payments, and other cost sharing requirements, forcing major sacrifices just in order to make ends meet. a recent study found that over 40% of women have unmet medical needs due to the cost of medical care. this problem is particularly acute in states that have not expanded medicaid. currently, three million uninsured women live in states that have not expanded medicaid coverage. so we have come so far in increasing access to affordable and adequate health care for women, but we still have a long way to go. this week is also national nurses week. and i can't pass up the chance to recognize the important contributions that nurses make,

improving women's and men's health care each day. after all, we might not have obamacare if it weren't for the support and advocacy of nurses all across the country. this year national nurses week, 2015, theme of -- is ethical practice quality care. it recognizings the importance of nursing and acknowledges the strong commitment compassion, and care nurses display in the pracktiffs their profession. registered nurses, r.n.'s, are the largest segment of the health care work force with 3.1 million r.n.s and that number is growing. r.n.s meet americans' health care needs on every level. they provide preventive care such as screenings and immunizations. they diagnose, treat and help to manage chronic illness, they help patients make critical health decisions every day. most importantly, nurses take the time to care for each patient during a difficult time in their or their families' lives.

we have plenty of evidence that hiring more nurses leads directly to improved quality care and patient outcomes. we have seen study after study showing that this connection, including a recent analysis showing that one out of every four unanticipated events that leads to death or injury are related to nurse understaffing. . and yet we see nurses understaffed at medical facilities around the country. they have said it's the single most important barrier they face in providing quality care to their patients. it's also a barrier to the quality of improvement, an effort to reduce preventable readmissions. i introduced legislation called the save nurse staffing, patient safety and quality care act, which would help solve the serious problem by establishing a federal minimum standard in all hospitals for direct care, registered nurse-to-nurse staffing ratios, but this

problem is not confined to hospitals. nursing homes are currently required to only have a direct care nurse on staff eight hours a day. this simply makes no sense. patients are in these facilities 24 hours a day and need access to round the clock nursing care. that's why i've introduced put a registered nurse in nursing homes act. this is the most ethical of our health care system and i applaud them and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause 12-a of rule 1, the chair declares the house in recess until 2:00

open debate on president obama's trade initiative but he stopped short of agreeing to demands to additional worker protections. democrats want mcconnell to package the so-called fast track trade authority promotion authority legislation with three other pieces of legislation, including one that would help workers affected by the massive trade agreement and one to crack down on currency manipulation. but majority leader mcconnell

so far is refusing insisting that senate can decide whether it wants the companion bills during the amendment process. again, you can see the senate live on c-span2. also coming up today, live coverage of a hearing on veterans' health care and benefits, including the implementation and future of the veterans choice act. witnesses include deputy veterans affairs secretary sloan gibson as well as the acting principal v.a. deputy undersecretary for health and leaders from veteran service organizations. that begins live at 2:45 eastern this afternoon on c-span3. >> this weekend the c-span cities tour has partnered with comcast to learn about the history and literary life of fort lauderdale, florida. >> so this was really cultural tourism and so when they would set up their villages along the way, along the trail, sometimes the buses would stop because here's a tourist attraction. the seminoles camping by the road.

and so when they came into the tourist attractions they were getting food, a weekly allotment of food and they were also getting sometimes like rental of sewing machines where they would rent and the people would use them when they lived in the tourist attraction and they also sometimes got fabric because it behooved the tourist attraction people to supply them with fabric so they were sitting there sewing and making things for a craft market. this is a little boy's shirt belted shirt from the 1920's. this was an experimental time for patchwork and you can see that on the bottom -- this is not a design, let's say, that's made it down today. this is a little experimental design. the designs were bigger in the 1920's, and sometimes they weren't used any longer than during that particular decade. >> the thing about the devil's triangle, the bermuda triangle, all things happened. bip 19 -- was a regular

navigation mission training mission, they would take off from the base and then flight 19's, they would go east, out towards the bahamas. there was -- they would drop bombs on that and continue on another 70 miles or so and they were supposed to make a turn north and go 100-something miles and make a turn back west towards fort lauderdale. they never came back. later at night after they were sure they were out of fuel they would send out those big rescue planes and that deappeared. there were 14 men aboard. and the next day they would start a five-day rescue mission. >> watch it at 5:30 p.m. eastern on c-span2's "book tv" and also sunday at 2:00 on "american history tv" on c-span3. >> and one of the issues congressional leaders are dealing with is transportation

funding. federal funds for highways and bridges runs out at the end of this month. president obama proposed a $478 billion program. bloomberg government hosted a summit focusing on infrastructure investments and transportation policy. and vice president joe biden spoke at this event. his comments are about 40 minutes. [applause] >> welcome back, everyone. thanks begin for joining us today as we kick off infrastructure week. we had a great discussion so far. conversations like these all the time on important subjects, but i think infrastructure is unique. it influences where we live, where we work, how we get around. literally impacts everyone and everyone has an opinion.

don: it was interesting, professor talked about -- i'm a little embarrassed to tell you how much time we nt spend here at bloomberg government talking about the merits of it as we go to our headquarters in new york. my personal opinion is that plane wins the vast majority of the time. i think we have a -- [laughter] don: as josh mentioned earlier you may know the vice president occasionally takes the 75-minute, 108-mile ride from washington up to wilmington, delaware. now, according to the american society of civil engineers, the bridges in washington maryland and delaware both 20% of them are functionally obsolete. more than 6% are structurally deficient. and in washington, 95% of the roads are considered in poor condition. now, i'm not a civil engineer, but i can give anecdotal evidence that on the roads from

my commute from arlington to d.c. is not in great shape. this is an important government and we at bloomberg government are proud to convened such an esteemed group of panelists. we're grateful that the vice president has taken time out of his incredibly busy schedule to share his unique perspective on this unique subject. please join me in welcoming vice president joe biden. [applause] vice president biden: governor, how you doing? good to see you. well, i tell you what, it's an honor to be part of bloomberg's government. you're supposed to laugh at that. [laughter] vice president biden: i spent last weekend with mike and he's the only one i know that has a government but he's doing great -- he's doing great, great things. and you all are as well. don, thank you for having me and, rich it's great to be with you pal. this has been a song we've been

singing for a long time together. and governor rin del and eric speegle, president of semen's -- siemen's of north has done important work. and chair of the u.s. chamber of commerce. is this on? can you all hear me? i understand that you are going to hear from or have heard from anthony fox and jeff, but i'd like to get right to the point with you. as i sat backstage with don, there is a debate in washington up on capitol hill as to whether or not we need to invest in infrastructure is mind-blowing. i've been here a long, long time. i understand the need for a

debate as to how to pay for what we need to do. i don't get the debate about whether or not we need to significantly invest in our infrastructure. 6 1/2 years ago the economy was in recession just short of debregs. and even before then the middle class was getting clobbered and the operative word that everyone heard constantly was outsourcing and top-down economics governed our politics and our economy both. when the president and i got into office we knew there had to be drastic changes made and we made them. very unpopular. very, very unpopular changes. the recovery act almost $840 billion. i might add every outside expert's looked at it, less than .4% of waste or fraud or abuse in the application of

that legislation. tarp. if you want to talk about maybe the hardest vote any member of congress ever had to take is to bail out the same guys that put us in the mess, that was a really difficult vote but we did it. not only were we told it was a dangerous thing to do, we would ruin the banking industry, the end result is every penny was paid back. the american banking system is sound and the american taxpayers made $15 billion in the process. dodd-frank, all the horror stories of how things were going to come to a screeching end, those of you that represent corporate america, you had little confidence in wall street. that's transparency. i come from the corporate state of america. i can promise you that's true. but now there's transparency. things are functioning and the stock market is bouncing back and forth between 18,000 and

17,900. when we took office, the question was, would it go below 6,000? the automobile rescue which no one wanted told we would never make 13 million automobiles a year. we made 21.6 million last year and we are moving. as well as the carrie engel, which was going to ruin you are -- as well as the affordable care act, which was going to ruin our health care. and now it's the slowest rate of growth and health care costs in recent history. but mostly because of the grit and determination of the american people, our economy has gone from crisis to recovery on the verge of resurgence. if we're smart if we act with a little bit of foresight. 12 million jobs, 62 straight months of growth, more jobs created in the entire industrial world combined since the recession hit. unemployment down from 10% to 5.4%. deficit cut by 2/3.

it wasn't because what we did. it was because of what all of you did. it was because people began to stand up and realized what in the hell was wrong. and now instead of my grandchildren are not going to hear about outsourcing, they're going to hear about insourcing. that's the operative word right now and will remain that if we're smart. one does a survey. every single year asks the 300 largest leading industrialists in the world, where is the best place in the world to invest? by margin larger anytime the survey has ever been taken, they said the united states of marek -- of america in every single solitary category from manufacturing to i.t. to service. and you have boston consulting group, some of you use them, every single year they survey, every american company that has an investment in china and a position in china, they ask, what are your plans for next

year? this year, 54% said they're coming home. talked to siemen's. talked to them and what they have done and so, folks, look there's a reason for this. we're going to -- we have now and will have for the remainder of the first half of this century and longer if we're smart the cheapest energy in the world. the epicenter of energy for the 21st century is not the saudi arabian peninsula. it is not nigeria. it is not venezuela. it is north america. number two, we have the best research universities in the world. we're basically have the only staple of research universities because we designed during the sputnik era, eisenhower decided to invest in our research universities. we also have the most venture

capitalist system in the world. and we have a rule of law to protect not only contractual rights but also intellectual property. and i might add, and i say this with my friend, rich here, we also have the most proconductive workers in the world. they are three times as proconductive as the workers in china, for example, and i want china to be proconductive. i want china to grow. i want the e.u. to grow. look, in order to keep our edge and to make this a permanent resurgence which it has the possibility of being for real -- i don't know how many of you guys i talked to before talking about how china will eat our lunch and how the e.u. we can't compete with. c'mon, man. no i'm serious. i'm being deadly earnest. we want them to do well. as they say in my own neighborhood of delaware, they are not a patch on our jeans if we're smart. if we act with a little bit of

foresight and less rank partisanship in this town. but there's two things we all know we have to do among many others. one, we have to have the most skilled work force in the world to keep this going and two, we have to have the most modern infrastructure in the world. the president asked me to head up an eight-month study on how we can be -- make sure we have the most skilled work force in the world. that warrants another and totally different speech. we've come up with a number of things and they are beginning to work. but the second thing we need, we can talk about today, is we need the most modern infrastructure in the world. first of all, let's get it straight, there's two things we need to get to this modern infrastructure. it needs to be modern because it is not now. it is not now. it is not now. we rank 28th in the world in transportation infrastructure. the united states of america

ranks 28 in the world in terms of a modern infrastructure. american society of engineers say we need to invest $3.6 trillion to get our infrastructure up to snuff by 2020. i assume they're off by 50%, and they're not. the second thing we have to focus on because of the age complexity and fundamentally changing nature of our energy mix as well as the increasing impact of severe weather occurrence, that's a euphemism for saying climate change, but i don't want to get into a debate with y'all with climate change. we still have guys in this town, i got criticized for saying, one senator denied as climate change. he will probably deny gravity. the point is, whatever you want to call it, there are severe, severe weather occurrences

putting our energy infrastructure at risk and there's a need for major repair major reorganization and major investment in our infrastructure, energy infrastructure. this is important not only for economic competitiveness of the 21st century but for simply our national security. it's desperately needed. look i can understand why my republican colleagues in -- by the way, if you noticed every time there is a problem i get sent up to the hill because i'm viewed as the least partisan guy. i have real relations. i have great respect for real for the members of the house and senate. but something's going on here. something different is going on in all the 36 years i served as a united states senator, chairing two of the major committees in the united states senate for about half of that time there's something different happening here. that old expression from another con-- context the tail is wagging the dog, in both

parties and the fact of the matter is it's got to change. and one example is here i can understand republicans debating about how to pay for needed investment. but i don't understand the debate about whether or not we need to invest in our infrastructure. and that's the debate. that's the debate. you all are here to talk about how to pay for it and what to prioritize. there's still debate up on the hill about whether or not it is even needed. look you all know as well as i do or better, in order to attract and keep investment in the united states, companies have to know they have to know they can get their raw materials of the factory floor they can get their proconduct to market cheaply and remain competitive, get it off-shore, get it on-shore. otherwise, they're going to locate where costs are cheaper and the movement of proconduct is more efficient and timely. businesses want to know, what's the access to freight rail and

the interstate highway system? can ports reliableably and quickly move my proconduct? how fast and reliable is the broadband network? is it affordable and accessible transportation to attract the jobs we need to fill here? how is the water supply? the stormwater runoff? sewers? are they available to handle our needs? how reliable is the energy grid especially during extreme weather? folks, these are the requirements of the 21st century, and we need the 21st century infrastructure. i know i got in trouble calling from the very newspaper that got me in trouble referring to an airport in new york as a third-world airport. did you notice they wrote an editorial saying close that third-world airport. that's the phrase they said. not me. i think the governor is on track on how to modernize it.

the point is everybody knows. it affects everything from attracting talent, reliable certain access to markets and it doesn't exist and increasingly we're moving behind. to repeat myself the american society of engineers said we need $3.6 trillion in additional investment. nearly one in four bridges, 7,000 are structurally obsolete making to more dangerous for people to drive over there, more expensive to fix and eventually when they become undrivable, extremely costly for the conduct of business and commerce. the cities like detroit but many others, they're replacing wooden -- hear me now -- wooden water pipelines installed in the 19th century. y'all laugh. a number of your cities have wooden pipelines that are transporting your water and your stormwater runoff.

sitting in your car, stuck in traffic cost americans over $100 billion a year. loss of productivity at work, loss of time with family, less time spending money in the community at movies, restaurants and much higher energy costs. and by the way, many of you live in the east coast. you know how much it cost to just take one linear mile to expand i-95 in the northeast corridor? nearly $20 million to $40 million. do you realize there are more people that get on an amtrak train in the east coast than every single solitary person that gets on and off an aircraft from maine to florida every day? are y'all aware of that? where are they going to go?

the population is expected to increase over the next 50 years by close to 35%. what do these guys expect? maybe by that time we'll have teleporting. [laughter] vice president biden: and we might. maybe they know something i don't know. but i don't get it. i generally don't get it. americans lose $22 billion a year stuck at congested airports waiting for their flights to leave. $22 billion a year. when our economy was growing and the middle class was prospering from 1946 to 1973, every economic study shows infrastructure investment represented about 4% of our g.d.p. that's federal and nonfederal investment in infrastructure during that period of time. today the federal government invests less than 1% of its

g.d.p. in transportation infrastructure. the government can't do it alone, but as the indispensible partner to states, communities and many times business who need certainty and planning and be able to bring in those projects on time and online. we need to modernize our transportation infrastructure, and you experts in here all know what that means. most people think it means our airports and our railroads and our bridges. but it's also our rivers. it's also our locks and our dams. there's billions and billions of dollars. there are more cargo sitting on top and the back of a ship in an ocean and port representing 70% of all, all the commerce in the world as i speak to you right now. there are' building panamac

ships, i took my republicans and democratic friends to go down to the panama canal, i call the eighth wonder of the world, to see these new locks. they're twice as big and carry twice as much cargo and they cannot dock from any port from houston to maine but two. what are we thinking? what are we thinking? we can't get the money to dredge those rivers and harbors and the ports? the former governor of pennsylvania can tell you, 40% of all the oil that takes care of the northeast goes up that delaware river through the delaware bay under the delaware -- up to the refineries. marcus hook, just south of philadelphia. what are we talking about? what do they need?

another epiphany? look, folks, we need to modernize our water infrastructure. sewage stormwater runoff safe water supplies. go back to the town you live in. ask your local city or county councilman what the biggest problem he or she has what they have? -- what they have. it's the enormous cost of the infrastructure work. and by the way, they don't have the tax base to do it. and even if they did, if they would do it, nobody sees it. so you get a chance to invest in the water -- in the stormwater drainage system, which causes enormous pollution, or you build a new park. it's not a hard choice. pour a politician to make. and we're getting further and further behind. absent these improvements, business will not grow and will not relocate because to be at

such a competitive disadvantage relative to their competitors around the world, notwithstanding all the other advantages we have here in the united states. and with regard to the energy grid and how rapidly it's aging and changing, we will not only suffer in terms of economic growth if we don't make investment and we don't modernize, we will face a national security dilemma, will jeopardize our -- approximately 50% of our nation's gas transmission and gathering pipelines were constructed in the 1950's and 1960's. as we build out the interstate pipeline network to meet the increasing and thriving demands of a post-world war ii economy, but 9% of those, of those distribution pipelines in the united states, are made of leaked prone materials. they require replacement.

those experts in new england, you understand the problem you're facing right now in terms of leakage coming out of those pipes and the environmental threats that are being proposed and the potential for some real disaster. and how and where we're producing energy is changing rapidly. that's the really good news. we used to import most of our oil from places like the mideast. russia used to be the number one supplier of natural gas in the world. today we have more oil and gas rigs pumping in america than ever before. in north dakota, for example, is now a major crude oil producer. in 2011, we're the world's number one producer of natural gas. these are big changes from six years ago. as implications for our infrastructure and how we can handle it and how these home-grown energy sources move across the country and around the world. our energy infrastructure has to capture the incredible growth in renewable energy. just since 2009, solar power generation has increased

20-fold, and wind power has tripled. now, the cost -- right now, the cost -- the cost of wind power is as cheap as the cost of coal . and what a phenomenal possibility it presents to the united states of america and to our environment. we need to ensure new transmission lines though, can carry this solar and wind to power more and more homes and businesses throughout the country, including in our rural areas. our energy infrastructure is increasingly vulnerable to extreme weather, as we see superstorms, wildfires and droughts. between 2002 and 2012, an estimated 679 widespread power -- widespread power outages occurred due to severe weather, costing the economy in those years between $18 billion a

year and $33 billion each year. the president and i started with the recovery act, which contained the largest public works project since the eisenhower interstate highway system. we invested $50 billion in transportation infrastructure, improved over 6,000 miles of rail, more than 350,000 miles of road, 20,000 bridges and -- to connect the entire infrastructure system. and by the way, this supported millions of good-paying jobs. millions of good-paying jobs. it was only the first step. our budget and legislative priorities have laid out an ambitious long-term investment in our entire infrastructure system including transportation and energy. this is what we should be debating about. the administration has put forward a plan to do that. we call it the grow america act, a six-year, $478 billion transportation bill that would do the following. it would provide $317 billion

over six years to our nation's highway systems so our roads, our bridges can move forward with the certainty they can see it through to the end saving hundreds and hundreds of thousands of jobs, i might add. continue the tiger grants, which bring federal, state and local and private partners together to get capital off the sideline, to connect the different points of our entire infrastructure. it doesn't matter a whole lot if you can get a proconduct to port coming in but you can't get that proconduct out on the road because you don't have a highway system, you don't have an access to them, you don't have a rail system. since 2009, we invested $4 billion in these tiger grants that leveraged over $14 billion off the sidelines. nearly $4 in private investment for every $1 in federal investment. we had to build on the success of cutting red tape and expediting the permitting

process on major infrastructure projects like the bridge in new york where we cut the permitting process from three to five years down to 1.5 years. we increased our federal commitment to public transit funding by more than 75% to meet the growing demands of rail and bus in cities, suburbs, rural communities all around the country. and we pay for it through a pro-growth corporate tax reform that would encourage companies to bring home profits and reinvest them here in the united states. we would levy a one-time 14% tax on $2 trillion in overseas profits held by american companies which in some cases is three times less the tax they would ordinarily pay if they would bring it home it would bring a one-time surplus of $268 billion dedicated directly to modernizing our infrastructure benefiting the american businesses, the very people who will be paying police tax as well as the

american middle class because we would begin to grow this economy again. and we have a plan for energy infrastructure. last month i released -- we released the quadrennial energy report which calls on congress to do a few things. one, helps states and companies cover the cost of digging up and repairing the miles and miles and miles of pipelines that has to be repaired and expanding transmission access. transmission line access. modernize intermodal hubs so that our ports are connected to freight rail connected to highways to move our home-grown energy around the world and bring our products to the world market. you know, we did something down the port of baltimore. the problem was, folks, that as much as the progress we made in the port of baltimore, it turns out that you couldn't get products to the port of baltimore. one of the reasons why manufacturing is still growing in the upper midwest where it used to be thriving and is

still surviving is through a tiger grant in a place called east baltimore. there's the largest rail connection head anywhere in the country. you go there and you see thousands upon thousands of railcars. they are directly connected to a line where we're allowing them to double stack containers because we are increasing the height of all the tunnels they have to go under going from east baltimore to the port of baltimore. and by the way, if you take the ports of baltimore, the port of philadelphia, the port of savannah the port of houston, they generate in those states anywhere from $90 to -- 90,000 to 310,000 jobs in that state, in each of those states. millions of jobs directly related to those ports being able to function. and so we're going to be able to move proconduct. westinghouse can move a

proconduct on the back of a ship 40% of the cost when this project is finished, generating economic growth not only throughout the midwest but throughout the country. and so folks, here we are. the provide the federal government more resources we're asking the congress to permit processing -- permitting quicker so we can get solar and wind energy and transmission lines up on -- running quicker. as they gut these agencies, it takes longer to get this permitting done. i think that's part of the process. i don't know what the goal is. but as they do it, that's the effect. accelerate the adoption of smart technologies like smart meters to help utility companies be more efficiently to help power outages in extreme consequences. i spent three hours in a area that weeks like a norad command center up in philadelphia looking at the largest electric company up there and how they try to balance these needs.

this is complicated stuff. but it all is made easier and significantly better for these companies if people would have smart meters so they can move quickly. folks, we also ask them to help pay for these investments through what i just described as this grow america act. and there's other pay-fors we have in our budget. again, if they don't like them, offer something else. tell us what they want done. we will be willing to listen. i will sit there for hours and compromise with them to get this done. look, these kinds of infrastructure jobs create a virtueous cycle. first of all, they retract and retain business. secondly, these are good middle-class paying jobs. you can actually raise a family on them. it creates and supports millions of jobs. it's not just the job on the construction site. it's a job at the steel mill. it's a job at the asphalt plant.

it's a job at the -- at the kilner. it's the job for all of the materials needed for this. in addition to that, it also creates jobs because these guys and women are able to go out and buy new cars. they're able to stop at the diner, lunch while working at the site. they're able to move and make sure they can take their kid on a vacation. these create -- this is a virtueous cycle that's generated by -- virtuous cycle that's generated by this. these are good-paying jobs. to go back to the question, i think there's absolutely no reasonable rationale no reasonable argument against a need for these investments. i've yet to hear one come from anyone. we can argue about specifics, but i have yet to hear that we can be in the same position we are now where there's deteriorating infrastructure. we can't come up for funding

for a highway bill. you hear me. a highway bill. we're going to have a patch hopefully occur very soon. so folks you know, we'll get through this period of dysfunction. the question is how much pain and how much loss of opportunity will we suffer as a result of the consequence of it? but we'll get through it. but we got to get to the point where we understand, it's not about compromise, it's about consensus. how do you govern a country as big, as strong, as powerful, as promising and as diverse as this one without being able to reach a consensus on every major issue? if the republicans in congress disagree i hope and i invite them to propose an alternative. but don't just do what they

recently did and walk away. they just passed a budgets in the house and senate with virtually no opposition and support. they lock in sequestration. they add another $500 billion in cuts to discretionary spending slashing infrastructure education and medical research. just the really smart things we need to be doing right now. insisting that by 2025 nondefense discretionary spending, that's infrastructure, will be 35% below the lowest level in the past half century. this is where we're going. and they would slash local transit, they slash local transit investment by more than 40% now if the budget becomes law, if it's enacted into law. they reduce the capital budget for the f.a.a., that's how we

repair and modernize our airports to the lowest levels in 15 years. what do they expect to happen? what do -- i'm being very serious. i know you can sense my frustration, but what do they expect to happen if we actually implement a budget like this? how can we lead in the 21st century not investing in our infrastructure? with our economy surging back, we're only spending 1.5% of our g.d.p. in total infrastructure. .5% on transportation infrastructure. where will these huge pamanic ships, carries three times as much cargo, 40% of the cost, where will they go to birth?

70% of all the cargo to and from that canal is carrying a proconduct from the back going from the united states abroad or coming to the united states. how are we going to transport 30 million barrels of crude oil a month from north dakota to the refineries in the gulf without a dependable, safer, more reliable infrastructure? all you have to do is turn on the television. there are not enough railcars. you hear me? there are not enough railcars in the united states of america to meet the need. and the danger of the transportation on an antiquated system is real, is real. it can blow up entire towns. how can american businesses and american economy lead if we

remain ranked 28th in the world? now that wind energy is as cheap as coal, having to climb nearly 50% in just the last four years now costing 85 cents a megawatt, how are we going to get this clean renewable energy to the cities, the towns, the homes, the factory without more transmission lines? what's going to happen when the category 1 hurricane, which is predicted, by the way, wipes out 300 to 400 substations in the gulf of mexico, texas and louisiana because they're below water? what do we do then? what is the cost to the economy , cost to citizens' health? let me end where i began. we need a debate. we need a debate, but that's why i'm really here, to say thank you and tell you we need

you. i don't ask you to agree with the way we propose funding this. i think it's the most rational way to do it because i think it's a win-win for business. you may not. but at least you all think we have to do it. we need you. we need you to talk to the house and senate. we need you to make concrete, real examples of what it means if you do not get the investment we need here. this is critical. and every day every year, every decade we wait it gets more expensive. the dangers increase. and the consequences are immense. my dad used to have an expression, and eddie's heard me say this lots of time. the only war worse one that's

intended is one that's unintended. the only sin a legislator and a president and vice president can make that's worse than coming up with a bad idea is coming up with no idea in the face of what everyone acknowledges is a pending looming and present crisis. so please, i hope you're all republicans. i really mean it. i hope you're all republicans. i hope you all have contacts. i hope you all are prepared to go up and make the argument because, folks i remember the day and many of you do here i remember the day when the fight about infrastructure there was no fight. republicans lid the fight. republicans were the ones out front. what happened? what happened?

ideology has become the master, and there's no applicability to this of all things one of the most nonpartisan issues the country can face. .

>> very busy week ahead in the house, including work on 2016 defense programs. legislation that bans abortions after 20 weeks and amending provisions of the patriot act that would end the n.s.a.'s collection of america's phone records.

follow the house live here on c-span when members return in about an hour. that will be at 2:00 p.m. eastern. remarks now from the president of the iraqi kurdistan region, barzani. he discussed security and other issues. the region's energy sector and his government's relations with the u.s. appearing with him is the iraqi kurdish foreign minister who translated his remarks. held by the council on foreign relations. this is about an hour. >> good afternoon, everyone. i'm jerry sign, the washington bureau chief of the wall street jurens. -- journal. as you know our very special guest today is masoud barzani, president of the kurdistan region of iraq. it's a pleasure and honor to have you with us at the council, mr. president. equally important is the

president's the foreign minister of the k.r.g. will serve as our interpreter so we can make this conversation happen in meaningful way. thank you very much for joining us. we appreciate it. mr. president, i thought i would start by asking you if you want to talk for a couple minutes, if you have something to say at the outset. perhaps summarizing your visit here this week or anything else you want to cover. then i'll launch in to ask some questions. we are speaking on the record today. after we have a conversation at about 1:00, i'll shut up and i'll open the floor to your questions and we'll have microphones that go around at that point. and very much look forward to having all of you join in the conversation as well. so mr. president.

president barzani: i would like to thank you for providing me with this opportunity. pleasure to meet some friends here around in this audience. our visit to washington came at the invitation of the white house. so we are here in order to communicate and convey our thanks to the president, the vice president, the american administration and the people of the united states for the support they have provided when we were faced with the terrorist of isis.

as you know that is almost a year that we have been a tough and difficult fight with the most brutal terrorist organization of the day. so far as a result of this we have given huge sacrifices, 1,200 curdy stands have been martered 7,000 have been wounded. -- yardy stands -- kurdistans have been martyred 7,000 have been wounded. at the beginning we have faced some difficulties. we were able to take full control of the situation and to liberate the areas.

we have been able so far to clear and liberate an area of 20,000 square kilometers and the peshmerga have full control in their hand. the area so-called, disputed territories, or areas of kurdistan outside, are almost in the hands of the peshmerga today. as we are ready to go back to the will of the people as it has been stimulated in the constitution to go back to the will of the people for the people to make the final decision of their choice, what do they want to be and to decide

their own future. we are committed to that and we are committed to respect the will and the choice of the population in these areas. and the losses suffered by isis, this is the information that we share also with the general, that they have lost 11,000 of their members. those who have been killed in our frontlines, those have been killed by peshmerga forces or those targeted by the air strikes. i would also like to share with you that the coordination of the cooperation between our forces, u.s. forces and coalition, but

this has been excellent and no civilians have been targeted throughout these operations. certainly if it were not for the air support provided by the united states, our losses would have been much more. at the same time had the peshmergas had the necessary and needed weapons, the losses would have been much less. isis is not a new organization. it's an expression of al qaeda. al qaeda many relied on those trends of the jihaddy trends.

isis benefited from that plus the added -- all the factions. isis would not have been able to achieve all that it has achieved. as an example, they were able to acquire 1,700 humvees or hummers because as a result of the wrong policies of the former prime minister former cabinet which paved the way for isis to take full control. so the frontline that we have with isis and iraqi kurdistan

that we have is 1,050 commerts, but as kurds we are on the for what purpose doesline which is 1,a00 kilometers -- 1,500 kilometers. and it's a source of pride for the people of kurdistan for the peshmerga that we have been able peshmerga has been able to destroy the myth and image of isis and a civil force. and also we believe that we are defending the common values. values that the free world believe in and cherish and we defend these values.

in addition to the cost of the war, the burdens of war and sustaining that war, we are under huge pressure economically for the -- providing refuge and sanctuary to the internally displaced people from the rest of iraq and the refugees from syria. all together is 1.5 million. a quarter after million or 250,000 of them are from syria. the rest are from different parts of iraq. there are arabs, christians they all have found refuge and

sanctuary in kurdistan. we will continue to provide services but their needs and expectations are far more beyond the capability and capacity of the k.r.g. as the relationship is much better than it was with the previous cabinet and we are working together in order to find solutions to the problem that we face. finally, i would like to say that we are delighted and pleased with or visit -- our

visit and call it a successful visit. we found out that there is a very good understanding of the kurdish question of the issues of the kurdish people, and there is we have been given assurances that the peshmergas will get the weapons and the requirements into their hands. jerry: mr. president thank you for that overview. let me start with that final thought. you said in your comments just now that the battle against isis would be easier if the peshmerga had the necessary weapons. what assurances did you get specifically while you were here that you will get the weapons that you need? and specifically, what does the peshmerga lack right now that you would like to see in the hands of your fighters?

president barzani: first, if we go back to the history of this issue, going back to the old days, due to the time of 2007 when general democracy was in charge of the u.s. forces in iraq, there was an agreement that the kurdish peshmerga forces, part of the iraqi national defense system, they would get their share from whatever the iraqi army gets. but unfortunately we did not receive neither bullets nor a piece of weapon. so the peshmergas had all outdated weapons and they were

the weapons that we have captured in the fight against the regime and other fights. indeed, we discuss this issue with the administration the details of this issue, and they will assure us that this will not be repeated again. and we were given assurances that there would be follow up on that. before now we did not get such kind of assurances. therefore we are pleased that that level of assurances have been given to k.r.g. jerry: just to be specific about your conversations here, do you believe washington confident that the president, the vice president, the secretary of state will make sure that that -- those assurances are followed

through? president barzani: we go back with full confidence and great hope to kurdistan. jerry: let me talk more broadly about your relationship with the government in baghdad, if i might. i'm curious about the status of the december agreement the questions that were to be resolved in that agreement particularly with regards to the sale of oil. what is the progress in implementing the december agreement? are you satisfied with it? are there things that need to be worked on?

president barzani: as far as the agreement skerpped, the k.r.g.

is required to provide 550,000 pounds per day for the federal government in baghdad to provide 17% share of the k.r.g. as it is in the iraqi budget for 2015. in april the k.r.g. provided and maybe more than what is required to, but according to the news that i have received, while here, baghdad has not honored that agreement to provide k.r.g. with its 17% share. indeed, it's less than the amount of oil that k.r.g. has given to baghdad to be sold. we will follow up on that when we go back. jerry: on that point -- i assume you raised that with officials of the administration here? will you have their assistance in making sure you get what the december agreement says the kurdish government is supposed to receive?

president barzani: before now and now they have been trying in order to encourage baghdad in order to stay committed to this agreement and to be implemented. jerry: there is becoming an important fight, what role do you think the peshmerga forces are likely to play in that enterprise?

president barzani: for your kind

information, mostle has got its own tactics. mostle have all sunni tribes or the adult population. in mostle you have arabs christian, different religions, different sects, and different ethniesities. therefore we have to find a formula to be agreed upon even before thinking of go to liberation of mostle. we have to find -- mosul. we have to find communication that all agree on. right now there is the a comity that has been established between baghdad and the united states in order to discuss a detailed plan for the liberation and the day after. the moment that agreement is reached, then the peshmerga is already in order to play a serious role in the liberation of mosul. jerry: one of the other factors that has changed in the regional political structure in recent weeks has been the emergence of

the p-5 plus one agreement with iran on the nuclear program. how do you think that agreement if it's executed, changes the regional political structure? and how specifically do you think it affects your part of the world,ed kurdistan section? -- world, the kurdistan section?

president barzani: i believe that will have an impact on the entire region -- region not only on kurdistan, but if that issue could be solved through understanding and dialogue, that will have the reduction or reducing the tension that exists in the area. jerry: how would you describe the extent of the iranian influence on the government in baghdad now? particularly the new government? president barzani: i believe this is a given fact that today iran has more influence on the ground than any other country in iraq. jerry: is that inevitable? or is that something that could be changed by american policy? by a new alignment within iraq itself?

president barzani: i believe in any contry, any given country it would be important for the people of that country to decide what kind of policy that they want and they have to decide for their own. what would the united states be able to do if the people of that country -- would they declare a war or what? jerry: one of the questions that inevitably follows you is the question of kurdish autonomy, kurdish self-determination, kurdish independence. what is your own thinking about the path forward on the question of kurdish autonomy?

president barzani: of course right now the priority for all of us is fighting isis, to continue to push them out and away from all areas. but the process to take place for the people of kurdistan to determine their future -- future and the people to exercise their right is a process that has started. it will not stop and we will not step back from that process. we are determined to continue

the path. jerry: mr. president, let me ask you one final question of my own and then i'll open it up to the audience. when you step back from the fight against isis, i'm just wondering, as we speak here today is isis being defeated or is it not being defeated?

president barzani: of course i think isis -- fighting isis should not be confined to military oppression. it has to be a military fight, intellectual fight, economic fight, logistics access, etc. therefore it's the responsibility of many in the international community to take part in that and honestly and faithfully to fight that. and it would not be good and it could not be in the interest of stability if any would try to use isis as a pressure card on the others. as far as our frontline is concerned, i can tell you that we have been able to give -- to make sure that isis suffered great losses, but still they pose a threat to us. at the same time isis has to be dealt with in both syria and

iraq to be defeated in both places. we can't target them in one place, leave the other area a free area for isis. jerry: mr. president, thank you for that. let me ask you for your questions. if you raise your hand. couple of quick requests. wait until i call upon you. please wait for the microphone. and state your name and your affiliation and we'll have a lot of questions. please keep them concise. i'll start right there. >> robert. welcome to washington, president barzani. the question is can you defeat darish in the ann bar province with the support of the sunni tribes? secondly, it seems everybody is fighting them. the peshmerga is fighting them. the shiite militia is fighting, the syrian army is fighting

them and u.s. air force sfiting them. how come they have been able to sustain themselves? where are they getting their weapons and money from? president barzani: first of all very briefly to respond to the groups that you mentioned, some

of them before fighting isis they have got their own internal problems fighting each other. therefore, isis is the beneficiary in this. this is also a question that we are being posted where do they get all these weapons and ammunition? we do realize that they have beenable to get some weapons from the syrian army. some weaponies from the maliki army. they also have got new weapons. they have got some missiles, anti-tavepk missiles and using them against us. jerry: if i might follow up, where do those come from? president barzani: i come here

to find an answer and somebody to tell us. jerry: we'll do what we can. >> trudy ruben from the philadelphia infirer. pleasure to see you again, mr. president. just a follow up on the question. in anbar and also in mosul, can isis be defeated if sunnis on the ground do not rise up and fight against them? do you feel that the central government is doing enough or will enough -- do enough to do the political things necessary to encourage sunnis to rise up? did you discuss this with the americans in your visit here, do you feel the u.s. should be doing more to somehow facilitate a political deal where sunnis in these provinces would be

encouraged to fight back against isis. president barzani: to be very honest with you in responding to

this question. first of all it's very necessary that the sunnis in mosul and tikrit to partake in this fight. the problem here is that i have shared that with the sunni, that's why i shared with you that i have told them that the sunnis have neither a united political or religious reference. that has created some difficulty among the sunnis.

for the sunnis to be able to play a more effective role, they have to put their act together. they have to unite them on themselves. in terms of this sensitivity it's a given fact that no one can deny that. we wish it had not been there. but it's there and there are problems between the federal government and these groups. that threat has not been dealt yet. jerry: let me first interject a question that comes from a councilmember who has been listening remotely. that's been emailed in. from kermit jones, rush university medical center in chicago. the question is, president barzani, in your recent remarks at the atlantic counsel, he reiterated an independent

kurdistan is coming once isis is defeated. in your vision, what role do you see peshmerga fighters playing in the broader regional fight against isis? president barzani: got to make sure he got the kurdistan is independent what role the peshmerga is play? jerry: in a broader struggle?

certainly, the peshmergas have been able to achieve what they have achieved so far in detrying isis with the very limited abilities that they have. certainly when peshmerga be an independent state, they'll be able to achieve much more. certainly with the peshmerga will be defending the values and principles as the free world all cherish. >> thank you. lehigh university. i was wondering whether your relationship with the syrian kurds has changed, especially after could he banny given the fact that in the past you had not been sympathetic to the p.y.d. so the k.n.c. emerge as the force in syria?

and in this context, where do you see and what is it your reference in terms of the future of what's happening in syria and assads reign?

president barzani: as far as the few tour of syria is concerned, indeed it is complicated and there is nothing in the horizon. the way i see it neither a military solution nor a political solution in the horizon. possibility of that for the current situation it will continue for a while. as far as the kurds, brothers and sisters, when they needed our help we sent peshmerga forces there. we have given wounded peshmergas to defend our sisters and brothers in syria.

we did not ask them if they were k.d.y. the kurdish people were attacked and it's our responsibility to protect them. we didn't ask which party they belong to. our future relations, we will travel so that they get their act together. they cooperate with each other. they have a clear statement so that we will be able to help them more. >> michael gordan, "new york times." sir, as i understand it kurdish law limits the presidents to two terms in office. your second term in office was extended by two years in 2013 until august of this year. do you plan to seek another extension of your term in office as president? or if there was significant internal opposition to that, would you step aside? thank you.

president barzani: these are two-year terms, two-year extension that was extended. it was not my request. it was imposed on me. now i have no doubt for extension and i will not ask for it.

and now i have written a letter, two years ago i written a letter to the parliament for them to car out an election to prepare the ground for this and for me to hand over the responsibility to the person who would be elected. and even now before my trip i have talked to the parliament and the political parties that they have to sort this issue out. certainly i would -- as a result of the presidency chair i -- >> it's always good to see you, mr. president, in washington. and i think many of us here really admire how the kurds have thrived in the last 25 years through so many conflicts. you have talked a little bit about iran a little bit about

syria. but i wonder if you could give us your impression of whether turkey is being cooperative in the struggles in the region, not only against isis but generally. a member of nato, very powerful country and very important obviously, to your region.

president barzani: we realized there was a big change in turkey, in their policies to the kurdish question. we felt thought this would be a good opportunity for us also to improve our relation was turkey and encourage and to cooperate with them in that. so we will continue on this in order to encourage a peaceful solution for the kurdish question in turkey. we interpret the relations with -- we enter in relations with turkey now. the fight against isis, turkey has some reservation. what we see right now that reservation has been decreased.

jerry: if i could just -- sorry. going to add, what lesson did you learn from the way -- what lessons perhaps turkey learned from the way they handled the fight over kobhani? president barzani: this was the second time for the peshmerga force to go from iraqi kurdistan. in order to support and to protect. the first time was in the year

1945-1946 during the times of the republic of kurdistan when the force went through asked kurdistan to help. this time they were from kurdistan to kobhani. of course without american cooperation and turkish cooperation, this would not have been possible. so a lesson that we have learned, there is oppression among us we would be able to achieve good results. the first peshmerga who martyred was martyred in peshmerga, and the one in 1986

they were cousins. jerry: way in the back there. just behind you. >> my -- my iraqi passport has been expired since march of this year. do you think i should wait the two years until i get kurdish passport? has anyone given promise to support kurdistan independence when you met, for example, the european leaders? thank you.

president barzani: until we get an independent kurdistan, can you renew your passport, extend your passport, the iraqi am boss door is here. he has concurred you can use that passport. in the past, there were many world leaders who were not ready to talk about kurdish independence or the rights of the kurdish people and the future of the kurds. right now that is no longer there.

so we have at least delighted to seat change that has taken place. in the past we will have known even before the meeting, we would have known what we would be told. still we would go, we would talk about our issues, and we would be told that this is a federal issue, we will not interfere. thank god now a days we are not hearing such kind of things. jerry: there and going there next. >> thank you. mr. president, i had a question on kurdish independence. assuming that there's progression for that objective. you see that as n end in itself as far as the kurdistan region of iraq is concerned? or do you see that as being a nucleus for perhaps a broader sort of kurdish coming together

given that the kurdish nation is spread across multiple countries in the region?

president barzani: throughout history there has been a lot of egregious committed against our people. our people were grived of rights especially after world war i when during the right to self-determination was supposed to be given to the kurdish people. each part has got its own characteristics. as a nation, yes, we are one nation, but we have to observe the new realities on the ground today. but most importantly, the most

important point is that neither he we as the kurdish nation nor other nations as we do, we should not be thinking about blood shed and wars in order to solve our problems. solving these problems have to be through democratic and peaceful means and for us when we talk about kurdish independence we talk about iraqi or southern parts of kurdistan for the other parts of kurdistan, it's up to the kurdish people in these areas to decide their own future. >> hi, nancy burke, george washington university. i have another eque about lessons learned. in the places you have liberated, i wonder what learning has been about the way isil tries to govern, what's been happening with the people there, other lesson about how isil operates? and then you mentioned the day after for mosul. i wonder what the process is in

the other areas that have been liberated for meeting the needs of the people? thank you, sir.

president barzani: as far as isis and the fighters are concerned, first the cali fat army, they are the foreign fighters who come from different parts of the world. the second group are those who were al qaeda and now adopted the ideology of isis, and some of the former bathist, they also have some other people with them at the beginning who were coordinating. now they have adopted their policies at this time.

they agree on whatever isis is doing, and they agree with the approach, with the conduct and behavior, and they have chosen to be with isis that has been chosen by isis. they are the minority. but the majority of the people there at the beginning, they were thinking that isis liberator, they came to rescue them from this. but that has changed afterwards when they realized the reality. the majority of the people are tired of isis and they want to change it. just imagine when one would live in such an area that everything would be imposed on you. imposed on you what to wear, do, eat, when to sleep and when to wake up. that's been very difficult to endure. as for the period that -- area that has been liberated, though who have come to the kurdistan region weep helped them. and those who stayed in these rareas, after those who left isis those that remain they

have been provided with respect and services and they have much more comfortable than the time they were under isis. and according to what they have told me personally when i visited these areas, they say we do not want to belong to any other area. we want to long to kurdistan region. of course we will provide every service and everything that we can provided that these people are not with isis. jerry: time for one last question. >> thank you robin wright, "the new yorker." what role is iran playing specifically today in terms of providing arms, in developing strategy one of your colleagues described solomani as the commander in chief in iraq would you disagree?

president barzani: of course iran provided assistance to us at the very early days of the fight against isis. we were in short of ammunition. that was a time that we did not have any. they provided that kind of ammunition. and that was a great help to us.

i talk on behalf of the kurds and pashmergas, they would not accept a foreigner to lead them. jerry: i believe i have to give you the last word. >> pleasure to have you here in d.c. second i'm sure i'll get the passport. i have a reflection question. more iraqi to an iraqi. my father when i started my political activism back in the early 1980's, when i asked him about describing the iraqi opposition and others, he said they need more deep rooted community connection for politics to flourish. after 30 years how does excellency see our politics and interest to converge rather than diverge at what we have now in iraq? thank you.

president barzani: your late father before you were born. he was a very thoughtful and very human person.

that is true for today. jerry: our time is up. >> we are going to leave the last couple seconds of this to go live to the u.s. house for one-minute speeches. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the prayer will be offered by the guest chaplain, reverend andrew walton, presbyterian church, washington, d.c. the chaplain: let us pray. as the gavel sounds and a new day of business begins, we paws to acknowledge the -- we pause to acknowledge the redemptive spirit of life that unites all people. transcending political persuasion, personal bias or cultural creed, we come seeking the wisdom of the ages that points us away from easy