away from fossil fuels for an energy efficiency and such sustainable injuries -- energies such as when, geothermal, and biomass. [applause] senator sanders: brothers and sisters, the united states of america remains one of the only major countries on earth, but does not guarantee health care to all people as they -- despite the modest gains of the affordable care act there are still those who are underinsured. despite that record, we end up spending almost twice as much per capita on health care of any other nation.

in my strong opinion, the notice date must -- united states must join the rest of the industrialized world and guarantee health car to all as a right. [applause] senator sanders: and we must do went through a medicare single payer program. is a time when millions of americans are struggling to keep their heads above water economically, at a time when senior poverty is increasing, at a time when millions of kids in this country don't get enough food to eat, my republican colleagues as part of their recently passed budget are trying to make a terrible situation even worse. if you can believe it, and this is true, the republican budget rose 27 million americans often

health insurance extracted -- makes drastic cuts in medicare and makes it harder for worker class families to afford college or put their kids in the head start program. and then, to add insult to injury, the republican budget provides huge tax breaks for the very richest people in this country while they raise taxes on working families. let me tell my republican colleagues that i respectfully disagree with their approach. [applause] senator sanders: instead of cutting social security, we are

going to expand social security benefits. instead of cutting head start and childcare, we are going to move to a universal pre-k system for all of the children of this country. as franklin delano roosevelt reminded us, a nation's greatness is judged not by what it provides to the most well-off, but how it treats the people most in need, and that is the kind of country we must become. [applause] senator sanders: and when we talk about education, let me make it very clear. in a highly competitive global economy we need the best educated force we can create.

it is in saint and counterproductive that hundreds of thousands of bright young people cannot afford to go to college and then millions of others leave school with a mountain of debt that burns them for decades. 2[applause] -- burdens them for decades. this is not what a great country is about. and that is why as president, i will try to make tuition in public colleges and universities forree. [applause] as well as substantially low interest rates on student loans. the young people of our country

are the future. they have to get the education they need. [applause] senator sanders: as everybody knows, we live in a difficult and dangerous world. there are people out there who would do us harm. as president i will defend this nation, but i will do it responsibly. as a member of congress, i voted against the war in iraq, and that was the right boat. -- vote. [applause] senator sanders: i am vigorously opposed to an endless perpetual war in the middle east. yes, we must be vigorous in

combating terrorism and deceiving isis. but we as a nation should not have to care that burden alone. we must be part of an international coalition led by the muslim nations that cannot only to the isis but begin the process of creating conditions for lasting peace. [applause] senator sanders: as some of you know, i was born in a faraway land called brooklyn, new york. my father came to this country from poland without a penny in his pocket, and having dropped out of school at a young age. my mother graduated high school in new york city. my father worked his entire life , never made much money.

my parents and brother and i lived in a small apartment. my mother's dream was to get a home of her own. she died young, and her dream was never for field -- fulfilled. as a kid, i learned in many ways every day in my house, what lack of money means to a family, and that is a lesson that i have never forgot to, and never will forget. [applause] senator sanders: i have seen as many of you have, the promise of america in our own life. my parents never in the never never, would have dreamed that there is sun would be a united states senator, let alone run for president.

but too many of our fellow americans, the dream of progress and opportunities being denied by the grind of the economy the puddles virtually all of the wealth and all of the income to the top. to those who say we cannot restore the dream, i say just look where we are standing today. as some of you will remember this youthful place was once an insanely railyard to that served no public purpose and was an eyesore. i worked with people of burlington to help turn this waterfront into the beautiful people oriented public space it is today. [applause] senator sanders: we took that fight to the courts to the

legislature, and to the people and we won. the lesson to be learned, and it is a profound political lesson. is that when people stand together, when people are prepared to fight back, there is nothing that cannot be accomplished. [applause] senator sanders: we can live in a country where every person has health care is a right, not a privilege we can live in a country where every parent can have quality and affordable childcare, and where all of our qualified young people can get a call college education regardless of their income. we can live in a country where every senior can live in dignity and security and not the forced

to choose between food and medicine. we can live in a country where every veteran who has put his or her life on the line to defend this nation gives the quality health care and benefits they have earned and deserve. [applause] senator sanders: we can live in a country where every person, no matter their race, religion, their disability or their sexual orientation realizes the firm -- full h promise of equality that is our right as is. brothers and sisters, that is the nation we can build together. and i ask you and people

throughout this country to join us in this campaign to build a future that works. >> the rest of bernie sanders beachspeech now. senator sanders: thank you. [applause] ♪ >> we apologize for that, the

video had some problems at the and of that speech. bernie sanders entering the democratic race. we are opening up our phone lines to hear your thoughts of what he brings to the presidential race. we do apologize about the video going in and out. here's how to join the conversation. you can also leave your comments at facebook.com/cpsspan. and can also send us a tweet. but let's hear from you, what does bernie sanders, the second

into the democratic race have for you? caller: i am really into his devout this is what the republicans -- they should've gotten rid of holder a long time ago. they sold us out. i'm very upset. giving millions of dollars to foreign countries when we starving here. i wish my party would get it back home -- a backbone is stop cowering to special interests. host: bernie sanders coming onto the stage a little bit earlier than expected. we will show you the holes each

a little bit later. caller: i am so fired up and excited. the progress is not if we of more than those who have much but if we provide for those who have little. he has the boldest agenda, to see that our fellow citizens today, who are living in the dark shadows of property have the means and resources and wherewithal to come out and enjoy the bright sunshine of opportunity, highlighted by the fact that it is disgraceful and shameful that the wealthiestarth has literally 23% of our children living in poverty, and republicans honestly believe in a survival of the fittest trickle-down economics which will actually see the grand canyon between the powerful privileged and the powerless grow ever greater. go bernie sanders. i'm so fired up. i'm excited about this campaign. host: next on our independent

line. caller: as far as what he brings to the race, it is fun to hear all of these lofty sayings. but the measure of any candidate is the small details. all anybody has to know when they listen to bernie sanders and a lot of other folks, is when they demonize 50% of the people in the country, and in the same breath say if we all come together we can accomplish great things, how can you demonize half of the country and expects to bring people together to solve the problem. host: who do you think he demonized in his comments? caller: all republicans.

host: thanks for your comments. we now go to a democratic line caller. caller: i am so for bernie sanders. he speaks right to me. i am 86 years old, and he talks to me like he is my father. believe me, we need a man in that white house, not somebody that has his hand out, looking for money. this is a marvelous man. he is a man. thank you so much. host: bernie sanders mentions that he is there in vermont, heading to iowa, and also to minnesota in the coming days. we will take your comments on twitter, you can send a tweet at c-span.

senator sanders playing out a plan for usa citizen friendly. how refreshing. senator sanders knows weakness of the labor law and standards. rings true with many. i i'm bernie and i want to distribute everything you own as i see fit. republican line. caller: i think he brings a breath of fresh air. here in the land of kevin mccarthy, we are changing our minds. it is unbelievable how the republicans can stand by and let this happen to the country. i changed my mind about the republican party. host: jake on the independent line. caller: i'm a student's combined 23 years old. it is great to see this man get

out there and speak for us. i millennial, i am never been so generalized for a political candidate. we have been waiting for this man to come along and cast his head in the ring great is about time we have so many speaking for us, not at us. host: who did you vote for in 2012? caller: barack obama. i actually not that he had some great progress of trade great we have had changed, but i disappointed great we have not seen as much trained -- change as we wanted. caller: i am a proud republican and bernie has changed my mind. i an electrical engineer, and my job is in china, my health care has gone away. i think we need a change. i am not seeing it with the republicans. all they are talking about is shipping our jobs overseas, and bernie is talking about taking care of them and protecting

them. host: lots of folks talking on facebook. i am a republican, but i think ernie sanders is a great politician i completely disagree with his politics, but he is truly honest and not influenced by others. daniel says pretty much how i feel about him too, but i am a conservative. he is is on manhattan that is rare in politics. there's lots more on facebook. new jersey, independent line caller. caller: i just wanted to say that my husband and i are thrilled that bernie sanders is finally decided to run for president. we hope that he is not frozen

out by the corporate media, and special interest with all the money to get can block came. -- to keep them from the rest of us. we do not know how many will be able to see him on c-span, but we are hoping that somehow someway, his voice will get through in this country because the things that he stands for they are obvious. it would be counterintuitive for people to be against some of the things that he wants to do for the middle class in particular. as far as the 90% tax rate of those who are afraid of socialism, that is a red herring scare tactic. there is so much money in this country, there is absolutely no need for any individual or group to pay 90% of their taxes unless our country would face some type of terrible reversal

financially. in that case, we would not have that possibility anyway. go party. host: that 90% was talked about in his comments, some reaction to that from gene in ohio. tax rate under eisenhower was actually 91% and the economy grew faster than it ever has since. george in connecticut, looking for your thoughts on what bernie sanders bring to the 2016 race. caller: stand up for bernie. god bless him. i am a democrat all my life. finally, someone who is going to stand up for the poor. god bless him. host: birmingham, massachusetts. republican line. caller: i think it is important to say that i am uneducated, i

only have any rate education, i am a nap and an american -- i am an african american, and very conservative. it is republican values that has saved me and tell me to become my own man. at 15 years old line father threw me out of the house, and he saved my life. i'm sick and tired of these liberals to the left continuing to enslave the black people mentally. they are enslaving the minorities by saying what they're going to do, and how they are going to do it, to help the poor. the only thing that i was able to help myself was by my conservative republican right-wing friends who came to my rescue and told me you have to blow yourself up by your bootstraps. they were there to help me, they were there to guide me and bernie sanders i've lost it

because i believe in america comes out and has begun to run for president should be applauded, and i'm glad that he is going to the democratic side because they need a choice. but i'm sick and tired of everybody always trying to playing the republican party. this is one african-american black man, and a proud republican, brought to live in america, and i think god for what my father did. i think god that the republican party stands for good traditional boundaries. we miss that in america today. host: we do want to let you know about our upcoming coverage in 2016. rick santorum is making a campaign announcement tomorrow in his hometown of butler pennsylvania. and on thursday, former new york governor george pataki is making an announcement. going into the weekend, former maryland governor martin o'malley expected to announce he is running for the democratic race. that will be live right after

washington journal at 10:00 a.m. eastern. let's go to bernie sanders announcement at 10:00 p.m. eastern and online. now to calls, independent line. caller: we finally got somebody good running for president. everybody needs to get behind him. host: what you think he brings to the race? caller: i think he is just trying to get a fair shake for the middle class. fair wage. host: leicester in wisconsin democrat line. caller: how are you today? host: doing well, how are you? caller: all i have to say is they ought to get somebody in there that does something to help our people over here in

business and so forth. they bring these foreign people over here and give them 10 years tax break or they don't have to pay any taxes. they give them money to get started in the business. what do they do to help our people in our country? nothing. host: our question this afternoon has been what does bernie sanders ring to the presidential race? lots of comments on twitter. angela says sanders as president rings me hope. i would like to see a real challenge to hillary rodham clinton, but this cannot be it . republican line, what are your thoughts? caller: thank you for having me. i am proud all myself republican. i do respect senator sanders and his effort to support the middle class and provide the ability to grow the middle class.

but 19th-century left-wing marxist policies championed by carl marx are not going to work. they are proven not to work. you can see what is going on in venezuela when you implement socialist ideas. bernie sanders makes obama look like a conservative, that is not going to work for me. host: one more call from independent line. caller: i used to be a republican, and i left because they strayed so far from american principles and i disagree with the gentleman who said 50% of americans are being misrepresented by this gentleman. in fact, 60% to 70% of our people are long under voting, which is the mandate that we no longer support our government and what they are doing. education and fair wages help all of us because when people

cannot get a fair wage the other people have to help subsidize their life. host: you get the last word on this. so what does bernie sanders bring to the campaign? caller: back to our basic core values of what it means to be 8:00 receipt -- to be a democracy, and to be a strong nation which we have strayed so far from. host: thank you for your comments editor calls, and we welcome your comments and calls at facebook.com. also send us a tweet. we will show the entire speech tonight. you will see it shortly life as well at c-span.org. while senator sanders and his colleagues will return for legislative work this sunday of the senate tries to hammer out a final solution to those expiring provisions of the patriot act, that issue came up in the white house briefing today with josh

earnest. >> afternoon everyone. hope you all enjoyed your memorial day weekend. before we get started, i want to point out that you spoke to the president already this morning about what was on his mind. the first was the need for the senate to take decisive action for them to pass the freedom act , and the president is hopeful that for the sake of our country's security and for the sake of our citizens privacy that the senate will meet that deadline. the second is the president also noted that he had the opportunity to place a phone call to governor abbott of texas. the president offered the people of texas who had been affected by these storms his concern to let them know that all of those individuals were in his thoughts and prayers. the present got an update on the

situation and the response efforts from governor effort -- evans, and pledged any needed assistance. he noted in that phone call, that he has a well-deserved reputation for cutting through red tape to ensure that resources are delivered to those who need it most. he is committed to upholding the reputation and the wake of these storms. with that, let's go ahead and get started with questions. >> does the president agreed with secretary carter's assessment that the iraqis give up the fight against isis? >> what the iraqi government has a goal is to some of the setbacks and ramadi, it was at least a part attributable to a breakdown in some military command and planning. what the president has observed that many of those four seas, if

not all the forces who have been fighting my soul -- isis and ramadi were not forces that have benefited from the training that the united states and the coalition partners had been a part of to help augment them. forces that have been augmented by local sunni tribes, and from the popular mobilization wars will be able to improve the performance we were pleased to see today that the iraqi government announced the beginning of the mission to retake ramadi and drive isil out of the province. that is a clear situation of the will of the security forces to fight and united states and coalition partners will stand

with them to do so. >> was he authorized by the white house to say that over the weekend? >> what secretary carter has said is analysis has indicated on a number of occasion that there is an important role for the united states and coalition partners to play in supporting those iraqi security forces. we have and this is something that secretary carter has also discussed we have seen a number of situations in which iraqi security forces have performed well in the effort to take them from iraqi forces. they were backed by air power and demonstrated not just the will to fight but important capabilities that allowed them to succeed against isil than most analysts had expected. we also have seen a more

relevant example that back in february there was significant concern expressed about iraqi security forces who have been driven out of the town of baghdadi by isil forces and many pointed to the success as evidence of their building momentum. we know that when iraqi security forces had to retreat from baghdadi they were able to reconstitute and retake them against isil forces. now baghdadi is a much smaller town than ramadi, but it does serve as a template for the kind of strategy that can be deployed against isil forces in anbar. it is building up and improving the security forces by incorporating local sunni tribal

fighters in the force. now it's important for those tribal fighters to be under the control of the iowa -- eyeiraqi government. the president and the rest of the administration has vowed to

work closely with the iraqis to make sure that this military equipment is getting where it's most needed there. is one specific example that i know that the iraqi's have been asking for that there is a military weapon in a t four that we believe can be valuable in trying to counter the v beds, the explosive devices that isil has used to great effect, car bomb that's they have used in some of these fights and the sense is that the use of these a. t.-4s could disable the car bombs and they could essentially stop the car bombs before they move into position where they have the maximum effect. many of them are armored

vehicles. that's an example of how improving the flow of equipment and making sure it gets into the hands of the iraqi security forces efficiently can make a difference on the battle field and that's something we're working on as well. >> when the vice president called yesterday, when that attempt by the white house to try to patch things up after secretary carter's remark. >> you know the readout of the telephone call that the vice president placed to prime mine sister. it was something that he has done over the last several months. the united states and our coalition partners stand ready to work with iraq, the central government of iraq to face down the threat that they -- that is posed by isil.

it is critically important for the security forces to operate in a multi-sectarian fashion igniting that country to face the threat will be critical to their success. the vice president also indicated our on going commitment to making sure we're partnering with them as they face down the threat and reiterating that the united states and our coalition partners cannot solve this problem for the iraqi people. we'll stand with our partners as they provide for the security of their own country. and this is something that the prime minister has indicated he wants. he doesn't want the united states military essentially trying to solve this problem for the iraqi people. what he's looking for the support as they confront this threat. that's what he's getting and the vice president called to let him know that he could continue to

expect that support. >> again, when we read out the telephone calls we typically will read out the conversation that is carried by our side of the conversation. so, if prime minister wants to say publicly about his conversation with the vice president they'll let him do that. >> one more on iraq. military said they've taken charge of the campaign and anbar and they've given an openly sectarian code name. i'm wondering what concerns the white house has about this and? >> i haven't seen that specific report. what we have indicated all along is that it will require a multisectarian force to succeed against isil and the reason for that is it's -- iraq is a diverse country and they're

going to need every element of their diversity to counter the specific threat and that's going to start with the central government of iraq governing the country in an inclusive fashion and require multisectarian security force to take the fight to isil and to not just drive isil out of the country but also to hold the ground. that is a message that the united states sent to prime minister and consistent with the way he's led that country in the nine or so months he's been the prime minister. and what we have indicated is that we've been pretty up front about this too. you can recall from the earliest days that the support of the united states was predicated

given to those professionals by the congress. that can only be renewed through an act of congress. there is judicial oversight over the use of those authorities. and the role for the judicial branch as well. what we know to be true is that the united states house of representatives, with strong support of a large number of republicans, passed the usa freedom act, which makes sure our national security professionals have the tools to keep a safe. at the same time, building in greater protections to protect civil liberties of the american people. that is the kind of solution the president called for a year and a half ago. because of the very good work of the national security team and

democrats and republicans in congress, this bipartisan compromise in the form of the usa freedom act was cameraed out. it is a credit to the speaker that he was able to build bipartisan support and get it passed in a timely fashion. we have not seen a similar effort in the senate. the president has been very clear that, if the u.s. senate does not act by the end of the day on sunday, there are critically important national security tools that will no longer be available. that will have -- there is some risk associated with taking those tools away from national security professionals. it is senator mcconnell himself who observed over the weekend that the u.s. is in a high threat period. certainly, senator mcconnell understands the stakes.

that is why we are hopeful that senator mcconnell, being cognizant of the environment in which our professionals are operating, will take necessary steps to help the senate passed the usa freedom act. >> there is still no plan b? mr. earnest: the kinds of authorities providing to security professionals in the usa freedom act are authorities that can be delegated by the congress. if congress acts, there will be no lapse in the program. if an act the freedom act, we will also see greater civil liberties protections built in, the reforms the president called for a year and a half ago. if the senate does not act there is no way to prevent those authorities from expiring. again, given that senator mcconnell has ignored we are operating in a high threat period, he as well as anyone

understands the kinds of risks associated with the senate failing to do their job. >> you said friday the president may make some calls over the weekend. mr. earnest: some calls were made out from your. -- here. >> sort of a narrow question. is the white house supporting this push on the telephone company provisions? to show they have done all that was needed? mr. earnest: i am not familiar with the certification. tell me what you mean. >> the notion they -- the issue of whether phone companies have developed technologies to store data they are supposed to store. the addition of a certification process.

mr. earnest: well, there are a couple things i can speak to. we know telecom companies collected data. that is information that is held currently by the u.s. government. when they are given a warrant they can search the data to try to root out terrorists and other people who may be wishing harm against the united states. the reforms contemplated in the usa freedom act would be that telecom companies would continue to hold data themselves. our security professionals, when given a warrant from the judicial branch, could go and search the data in response to threats they have deducted. this is a system we know operate. the second thing that is true is that there are going to be some changes to the standard

operating procedure involved when the government is no longer holding data and is rather searching data held by telecom companies. that is why, written into the freedom act, is a 180 day implementation period to allow for the transition to take place. that 180 days was a transition period that was essentially decided upon by national security agency, who said it would require six months to execute the transition. we are confident that is how long will be required to make changes. if we later determined six months is not enough time for the transition to take place the administration is committed to going to congress and asking for an additional period of done. >> you do not want to see that built-in now as part of the process?

that is something you would like to see implemented later? mr. earnest: in terms of the implementation? what is clear, nsa has indicated they need six months to get this done. that is why we believe we should move forward with the usa freedom act. if it turns out they need additional time, the administration will come back to them. >> i think it is hard, as a journalist, to get our head around the idea that government spy programs -- i think what we are going to get to is, are you in the process of creating framework for legal justification? if you need to keep doing that without a legislative structure that enables that? i'm sure you do not want to

promote the idea that you're doing that. but it is just unfathomable that you would be like, congress says there is no way we can do that. what are you doing in the event this does not get extended past the deadline? mr. earnest: these are authorities that can only be given to the executive branch by the u.s. congress. >> nothing the executive branch could advocate for if you thought you are in -- you needed to? mr. earnest: i refer you to the nsa or department of justice on this. i am not aware of any plan b that exists that is currently being contemplated. there are significant consequences for the senate's failure to act. it would certainly put at great risk these programs. and could risk a lapse in important security capabilities

that the president has said is critical to national security. importantly, it would also put at risk the bipartisan compromise around the kinds of civil liberties protections the president also believes are important. that is why we would like to see the senate act before sunday in passing the freedom act. in terms of additional authorities that agencies might seek, i refer you to the department of justice. >> you are saying significant risk. if this program or the aspects of the patriot act expire on sunday, are we at greater risk of a terrorist attack? mr. earnest: the consequence of this would have on national security, i would refer you to the intelligence agencies on this. they can't speak to what role the authorities play in terms of protecting the country. i can tell you they do play a role in protecting the country. if the congress does not act by the deadline on sunday, those

programs will lapse. >> what is the president going to do about it between now and then? you are only three votes short. what is he doing to get the three votes? mr. earnest: let me say a couple things. what is important for everybody to remember is how it got to this point. the president actually did, a year and a half ago, give a speech in front of all of you to indicate these kinds of reforms were badly needed. this was a hotly debated notion. the president saying, we need to protect these authorities but there is a way to better balance them to protect civil liberties. the president did that a urine half ago. for the last year and a half -- a year and a half ago. for the last year and a half, congress has understood if they did not act, authorities would lapse.

so, what the president and his security team did is go to capitol hill and worked with democrats and republicans to fashion a bipartisan compromise. untangling all of this and making sure the core authority was protected while building and protections for civil liberties working through the challenges presented by technology and the large quantity of data we are talking about, that is hard work. that is a difficult policy problem. we have talked in the past about how congress, in recent months, have struggled to do simple things. this is an example where working in bipartisan fashion with security agencies, this difficult policy problem was essentially solved. now we are onto a much more rudimentary, basic frankly simple problem. getting the senate to do their job. we have built a bipartisan consensus.

or at least strong bipartisan agreement that is necessary. we have worked through policy details. it is just the responsibility of the senate to protect the country. >> this program expires in five days. you said it is important to protecting national security. you are three votes shy in the senate. what is the president doing now? is he making calls to get the votes? is he calling senators to meet with him during the recess? what is he doing to get the votes? i understand the past. we are five days away from expiring. mr. earnest: i am not going to read out any private conversations the president has had. the president is certainly ready and willing to have any conversations that are necessary. i would not rule out the president having those conversations. the point is, john, all the hard work has been done on this. it is a couple get a policy. you are working through partisan politics involved, trying to

understand technology involved. the stakes are high when it comes to national security. when it comes to civil liberties. all of that has been worked out because of the president and his security team working effectively with democrats and republicans. the other thing i would point out is that every single democrat in the senate voted for this compromise. right now, what we are seeing is a difference of opinion on the republican side of the aisle. at some point, the political ambitions of individual members of the senate will have to come second to the national security of the united states. >> on the other topic, words from secretary carter, i did not hear a direct answer. i would ask you -- does the president agreed with secretary carter that the iraqis did not show a will to fight in ramadi? mr. earnest: what happened in

ramadi, there are a variety of contributors what happened in ramadi. the first is that the iraqi security forces fighting in ramadi did not have the benefit of training of the u.s. and our coalition partners. there were clearly some military planning problems that occurred. we saw a pretty effective tactic used by isil. all of that led to a not unsubstantial setback in ramadi. mr. earnest: what the defense secretary's set was the iraqis showed no will to fight. the iraqi forces showed no will to fight. mr. earnest: that has certainly been a problem we have seen in the past. that is what allowed isil to make significant gains last summer. what the coalition has been

focused on is making sure we can enhance the capacity of iraqi security forces in supporting the central government as they try to re-night -- reunite the country to face the threat that is both by isil. >> the forces leading the counteroffensive announced today are the shia militia supported by iran. the iranians said over the weekend in response to ashton carter's statement, the americans have shown no will to fight. they do not do anything. as isis took over ramadi. what do you say to the iranians saying to the u.s. we have no will to fight? mr. earnest: we have been very clear about the what -- what the united states is willing to do to support the iraqi government

and iraqi people as they face down the isil threat in their country. that is everything from training and equipping soldiers to providing military air power to backup the battlefield. there is a whole range of other support we have offered in terms of trying to shut down foreign fighters to the front lines fighting alongside isil. we are trying to shut down isil's source of funding. this will have an impact on the ability of a multi-sectarian security force to fight ice all in their country. this is not something the u.s. is willing to do for the iraqi people. the central government has made clear on a number of occasions abadi does not want anyone to do this for them. he is prepared to bring the country together and mobilize a multi-sectarian security force

to face down the threat in his country. that is what coalition partners stand ready to do. >> to follow up on what roberta asked, whether or not the vice president's call was to patch things up. but i want to ask about the motivation. whether this was a diplomatic call. were they playing a little good cop bad cop? mr. earnest: i do not have more to say on the telephone call that i have already said. the vice president has an effective working relationship with prime minister abadi. vice president biden has experience in iraq. both when he operated in the senate and as vice president. he traveled to the country many

times to establish relationships there. he speaks frequently with the prime minister of iraq. this most recent telephone call was placed over the weekend. it was one that was motivated to again, communicate directly with prime minister abadi. the u.s. continues to be committed to ongoing efforts there against title. -- s -- isil. whether it is continuing to train and equip security forces working closely with them to provide advice, or even carrying out airstrikes in support of his security forces operating on the ground, the united states stands ready to be a good partner. >> committed is different than the way things are being carried out. mr. earnest: as we have talked

about in the last week, there are going to be periods of setback. we are pleased with the progress that has been made. whether that is the progress in tikrit the situation in baghdadi in the western embarq province the iraqi security forces were able to retake that town in embarq -- anbar province. last year, we saw the success of iraqi security forces around mosul. these are critically important areas where we had demonstrated progress based on the strategy the president laid out. we have also seen setbacks as well. the president and vice president, in a telephone call placed to the prime minister, is dedicated to making sure that

the commitment of the united states in the face of setbacks has not waned. >> let me ask you about the setback in ramadi. you talked about many of the fighters not being trained by coalition forces. is there concern at the white house about what appears to be increasing sophistication on the part of islamic state, including reports that in the lead up to taking ramadi, for example, that they had good discipline in cutting off social media? that they were able to move fighters in using different vehicles to evade u.s. intelligence detection? how much concern is there that part of this is not about what the iraqi side is doing but increasing sophistication and a quick learning curve on the part of islamic state? mr. earnest: the administration has been very clear from the beginning of the efforts that we take seriously the threat posed by isil. many of these are individuals

who were affiliated with al qaeda previously. some of these are individuals who had previously served in high-ranking positions of the iraq he army. the sophistication and capability of isil forces is not particularly surprising. we have acknowledged how dangerous they are. that said, we also know there are tools and techniques that can be used to counter and to feed them -- defeat them. whether that is the success in tikrit -- you will recall i sold took over tikrit -- >> the question was about the setbacks and the learning curve. mr. earnest: the point is, isil has experienced progress and setbacks as well. what is true is that the

strategy that the president has deployed alongside our coalition partners, has more often than not yielded important successes. that strategy is predicated on having a capable willing fighting force on the ground. made up of iraqis, multi-sectarian in nature, under control of the central government. the u.s. is training and equipping those fighters, making clear they need to operate under the command of central government. when they are at the battlefield we are backing their efforts on the ground with military airstrikes. this is a strategy that has yielded success in a variety of areas. there is a lot more important work that needs to get done. whether it is ramadi, anbar mosul. we continue to have confidence in the strategy.

the other thing we have been clear about, this is not a fight that you -- the u.s. will fight for the iraqi people. they will enjoy the support of our coalition partners. but we have been clear the strategy is not a quick fix. this is a strategy that will take time. that is training it -- iraqi security forces in these techniques. that is why the president indicated this would require a long-term commitment. it is not a short-term proposition. we are mindful of that even as we face some of the setbacks we have seen in recent days. >> you said with u.s. training, that iraqi forces can be more efficient. is that not an education -- indication john mccain has a point that thousands more

trainers are needed there? mr. earnest: again there is a well-documented history of differing views between barack obama and john mccain on iraq. i will not revisit all of those here. >> even military experts say more advisers might help. mr. earnest: again, as the president makes these decisions and considers our strategy, he is going to listen carefully to members of his national security team and to the military on the ground who are evaluating the strategy, the progress made so far. and who are evaluating what steps can be taken to address setbacks that have been experienced. that is something the president will be listening to as he makes decisions in the months ahead. >> on the nsa issue, didn't they say they would be winding down programs on friday? have they started to one them

down? if so, is that increasing the risk of a terrorist plot? mr. earnest: the nsa indicated if the senate did not act by the end of the day on friday, they would need to begin winding down this program. and i understand that they had started winding down the program. what impact that has on their capability is something you should ask them. i cannot speak to that directly. what impact it has on national security, you can ask them. all i know is that this is a -- they indicated based on the complexity of infrastructure, they would begin taking steps to unwind the program by friday. to ensure that if the program was not renewed by the sunday deadline that they would make sure they were in compliance with the law. they will be in compliance with the law.

they begin those preparations last week. >> told the program be fully wound down by sunday? mr. earnest: give the senate does not act and if congress has not given the authority they need to carry out the program. then, yes, programs will lapse. >> i want to follow up. during the bush years, they were trying to shore up against al qaeda. and now we are standing against isil. what will change to create a success in this situation? we are hearing the same words for the last couple of years. mr. earnest: what is critical to the iraqi people is pooling the

diversity of the country together to stand up to the threat. that will start with political leadership. the previous prime minister had governed the country in a sectarian passion that left the sunni elements of the population convinced he was not particularly interested or invested in their security or in their security needs. there are differences when it comes to economic policy. i have very concerned about government funds and investment from the central government in the kurdish-sunni areas of the country. what iraq will require is a central government committed to governing in a responsible fashion. we have seen prime minister abadi follow-through in his first months in office. he is seeking to unite the country in a multi-sectarian fashion.

the u.s. has been pleased with that not just because we are dedicated to the notion of seeing people follow through on commitments but also because we know it will be critical to the national security of iraq. if they are going to succeed in stabilizing the country, they are going to need a diverse population to come together and face down the external threats they face. that is what will be critical to their success. we have made that a priority from the very beginning of the campaign. you will recall there were questions in this room about why the scope of the bombing campaign was so limited in nature. we indicated that, in order to expand involvement in the country, the u.s. was going to need a partner in the iraqi central government that was committed to governing in an inclusive fashion. that is what we have gotten from prime minister abadi. it is important that we see that kind of multi-sectarian

commitment be applied when it comes to iraqi security forces as well. the cannot just see shia forces fighting in shia parts of the country. we need to see a multi-sectarian force being deployed to every area of the country to counter the threat from isil. >> is the white house what is -- watching what is happening in the cities, chicago, baltimore? we saw a large number of shootings in baltimore specifically. what is the thought of the white house about what happened this weekend? what will turn the situation around as they are in the spotlight again in urban cities? mr. earnest: we are certainly continuing to be concerned by the violence we are seeing in

cities across the country. it is an indication of how widespread the violence has become. in some ways, it does not break through news coverage anymore. when you see this rash of violence. this is something the president has talked about quite a bit. it is a reflection of entrenched problems. obviously, there is some common sense things we can do. certainly, gun safety laws in congress that could keep guns out of the hands of criminals would be one thing we can do to try to limit violence. there is more we can do to try to address some of the dire economic circumstances in some urban communities. there is more we can do to support local government and leaders in the community to try to meet the needs of local populations. this is going to require -- there is no one simple answer to address this. but it is a challenge the

president is ready to confront. >> summer has started unofficially. and numbers go up in the summer. the issue is, what is the administration prepared to do in urban cities? they're talking about not necessarily funding summer jobs programs and closing rec centers. what is on the table in the short-term for the summer, not long-term, to ease the problem? mr. earnest: i will follow up with you at the department of housing, department of labor. each agency has programs working with local officials to address the problems you have identified. >> and the president, if you would like to talk. mr. earnest: we will see what we can do. >> it looks like the house could

take up cpa next week. there are over a dozen democrats on the record saying they would support the legislation. is the white house going to intensify the need to make an effort in the senate to get the bill across? mr. earnest: the white house has already been very mindful, including the president of how difficult a challenge this will be in the house of representatives. many political observers who know more about the process believe it will be more difficult to build bipartisan support in the house then senate for this legislation. we were gratified there were 14 democrats who ultimately voted to support trade promotion authority. that is about one third in the senate. that is an indication that, when we have the opportunity to make

a case to democratic members of congress about this being the most progressive trade promotion authority legislation at the senate, when we talk about the opportunity that exists for creating jobs, extending economic opportunity for middle-class families by opening up more overseas markets to u.s. goods and services, that is a message that resonates with democrats. that is an opportunity that we are going to capitalize on in the house. i will tell you that, it will not just be today that the administration or even the president begins to make the case to democrats in the house about how important it is to support this specific legislative proposal. we have been very the ground in advance of house consideration of this legislation. we are certainly going to make a case consistent with the case we made in the senate that yielded

support of about one third of democrats in the senate. >> prime minister netanyahu said he would be open to these officers -- peace officers with the palestinians. does the white house have any response to the offer? mr. earnest: i do not have a direct response to him. what we have said is that the conflict between the israelis and palestinians will only be finally resolved when the israelis and palestinians sit down and resolve differences face-to-face. the u.s. and certainly the obama administration has expressed willingness to facilitate conversations. we have gone to great lengths to do that. i did not see specific comments. but based on what you said, it sounds broadly consistent with what we have indicated in the past. that willingness to have

face-to-face conversations to try to resolve differences is at least a start to ultimately putting in the past this long-running conflict. >> you said earlier -- i want to make sure you meant to say -- you said if the senate acts, the authorities will not expire. if the senate passes the usa freedom act, we can protect our citizens, as if to suggest two different tracks. the reason i caught on to that is because it might be a way out in the short term. were you suggesting that the president is open to a short-term extension of existing authorities of some duration separate from the usa freedom act? were you suggesting that is a potential resolution the white

house is open to? mr. earnest: i'm not trying to give you that impression. primarily because we have seen -- and i think it was embarrassingly clear on the senate floor friday night -- they -- that is not an option. the only option before the senate that will not put these critically important programs at risk is to pass the usa freedom act before sunday night. >> i would like you to go even farther. assess what you saw friday night in votes. three votes short on the usa freedom act. a substantial 15 votes short on reauthorization of the patriot act. what does that tell you? where do you believe this puts the debate going forward? mr. earnest: what makes clear is there is strong bipartisan support for the usa freedom act.

we saw that clear bipartisan support in the u.s. house of representatives. 338 democrats and republicans voted for that legislation. in the senate, we saw 57 democrats and republicans voted to begin the debate on this particular piece of legislation. that is an indication there a similar support for this legislation in the u.s. senate. so as i was conveying to john, the hard work of this has already been done. these are obligated policy issues that deal with national security and civil liberties that deal with cutting edge technology, unimaginable amounts of data. and to work through, in this highly partisan political environment, a bipartisan copper must -- compromise through a dysfunctional house of representatives is an a compliment. i do not mean that as a backhanded koppelman. republicans deserve credit for

working with democrats and security professionals to reach a common ground. the hard work has been done. we also can surmise from the vote there is similar support in the u.s. senate. we just need to allow members of the senate the legislation to come up for a debate. they need to allow that to happen before the deadline on sunday. >> can you assess what have been called inconvenient facts, the presidents own view panel could not find an instance in which a terrorist threat was for -- thwarted. if it is so important, why has it not stop anyone? mr. earnest: our security professionals who deal with this on a daily basis are working to keep us safe and say these are

authorities are programs that benefit their efforts. so the details of that, i refer you to them. they can speak to that more effectively and with more detail than i can. all i can say is that the president listens carefully to his national security team for advice about what is necessary to protect the country. what the security team tells him is that these programs that are authorized by the usa freedom act are critically important to protecting the country. that is why we are urging the senate to do what the house of representatives has done in bipartisan fashion, pass the proposal to protect the country and our civil liberties before the deadline. >> you mentioned one third of the democratic senate. is that goal also for the house? mr. earnest: it is not. we are hoping for a slim

bipartisan majority. i use that as an illustration. when considered by the senate finance committee, a majority of democrats on the finance committee supported this legislation. it was considered on the floor. about one third of the democrats supported this legislation. an indication that when democrats focus on a proposal and evaluating arguments, there is a reason for a substantial number of them to support it. we are confident that members of the house and the democratic caucus will find something. >> which is the higher priority for the president right now? tpa? mr. earnest: because of the deadline, we need the senate to act. the senate can focus on the usa freedom act to get that done by friday night. the house can focus on tpa after

they returned from recess. we can divide and conquer. kevin? >> i have heard you say on many occasions that the administration's position is to support the iraqi people but this is a problem they need to solve on their own. i'm curious if you feel the same way about the problems that are currently ongoing in ukraine. this is a ukrainian problem. we can assist in a broadway but ultimately, it is ukraine's problem. in particular with russian aggression. mr. earnest: the situation is different. in ukraine, we are talking about a sovereign country being menaced. their sovereignty is being violated by a larger neighbor. iraq is dealing with a much different kind of threat from a terrorist organization. but what is true in iraq is also true -- one thing that is true

in iraq that is also true in ukraine is that the u.s. is standing by our ukrainian partners as they try to confront the threat to their security. the u.s. is not prepared to go to war over ukraine. we made that clear. at the same time, there may be an opportunity for the u.s. and our nato partners to help them confront the threat they are facing from russia, who so flagrantly violated territorial integrity. this is something i anticipate the president will be talking about next week when he travels to the g7 meeting. >> the south china sea, has the president been briefed on china's alleged island building, and he -- is he aware of back and forth between reconnaissance and aircraft and chinese aircraft? mr. earnest: the president has often talked about how important

the security situation is in the south china sea. it is critical to the security of the u.s. and the global economy. the free flow of commerce in the south china sea is something that needs to be maintained. the u.s. is committed to working to -- with the other countries in the region to protect it. because it is a priority, you can expect the president has been briefed on the latest in the situation and will continue to be. >> the approaching deadline, june 1, is when the telegram -- taliban 5 are alleged to be released. i heard general mcchrystal tell fox that admiral mullen knew immediately.

does the president know immediately that they had walked away? mr. earnest: there is a process in the military described in the code of military justice. that is a process that is being conducted right now. there are army investigators responsible for interviewing sergeant bergdahl and others who may have had information with his disappearance. i'm not going to weigh in on the situation until that justice process has run its course. >> you are unwilling to state whether or not the president knew he had walked away and that was common knowledge? mr. earnest: kevin, there is a justice process that is conducted by the military, described in the code of military justice. that is a process that is

underway right now. you are talking about the commander-in-chief. i will be particularly sensitive about the need to make sure anything i say on his behalf is perceived as interfering -- not perceived as interfering in the process in any way. >> i understand. i am just wondering if that would have mattered. mr. earnest: what was at stake in the mind of the president was the principle that we do not leave anybody in uniform, any man or woman behind. in this case, he had a special responsibility to live up to that value. that is the value the president applied in this case. at the same time, the president also believes that every man and woman who is serving in the u.s. military is also subject to a u.s. code of military justice. that is a process that is working its way through right now. >> nato, anything more they can be doing to support the iraqi people? mr. earnest: kevin, we have a

coalition of more than 60 countries. to continue to be in touch with our partners about steps they can take to support our ongoing strategy to destroy isil. whether that is a military contribution or a contribution to training efforts were the ongoing effort to shut down flow of foreign fighters or counter isil's online messaging, there is a variety of elements. we certainly welcome the contribution we have from so many members of the coalition. richard? >> first thing. is the president satisfied with air support and airstrikes? gizzi satisfied with results? mr. earnest: airstrikes have had an important impact on the battlefield. tikrit is an example where iraqi

forces struggled to displace fighters. when they restarted the offenses with backing of military air, they were much more effective. there are a number of examples where the effective deployment of military airstrikes has degraded isil. >> it did not have that impact in ramadi, obviously. mr. earnest: each situation is different, but there is a strategy we employed in tikrit we will also employ in ramadi, making sure we have a multi-sectarian security force under the command of iraqi central government. when they get training and equipment, backed by coalition airpower, we believe they can be effective on the battlefield. >> talking about equipment, how

does the president feel when the iraqi forces leave millions of dollars of u.s. equipment on the ground? mr. earnest: the security forces operating in ramadi did not have the benefit of u.s. military training. they had it women, not the ability -- the equipment, not the ability of u.s. training. that is why we would like to see greater training so they can operate more effectively. >> does the president share the frustration towards cuts in defense budgets? mr. earnest: you heard the president talk about this on a number of occasions. we had expectations about the contributions made by nato allies to mutual defense funding. that requires a substantial

financial commitment on behalf of our nato allies to a shared effort. the u.s. has certainly lived up to the responsibilities we have. we are counting on our alliance partners to do the same. >> making phone calls were reaching people next week in germany about that? mr. earnest: i do not have anything to preview. this continues to be a priority for the u.s.. we have expectations that our allies will live up to their responsibilities to dedicate the necessary funding to provide for the security of every nato ally. >> what was reaction from the white house? mr. earnest: we have seen russia engage in military exercises in the past. it is not a particular surprise. but it is something we monitor

for any impact it might have on safety and security of nato allies. we know there is a tendency in some situations where russia has engaged in military exercises near our baltic members of the nato alliance. sometimes, operations take place in the north sea. we are mindful of the exercises we have seen in the past and monitor them for any impact they may have on security of nato allies. >> ukraine, what is the current situation? this has nothing to do with the current situation in ukraine? mr. earnest: this is something we are monitoring. i much with the latest military exercises are taking place that post ukraine. we have seen other instances where military exercises around ukraine have had an impact on ukraine's security situation. given the frequency with which the russian military facilitates

movement of weapons and personnel across the ukrainian border, those kinds of movements are of some concern. that is why we monitor the situation closely. i will give you the last one. >> who does the president will responsible for palmyra? mr. earnest: what we have made clear is that the situation in syria is one that is the responsibility of the assad government, and it is his failed leadership that contributed the chaos and instability that allowed isil to both organized and also expand their footprint. ultimately, it is that failed leadership that has destabilized the situation in syria, country but it to the spread of violence

, and spread to iraq. we continue to believe that president assad must go, that a political transition must occur to bring stability to syria and have an impact on our ability to fight isil and bring stability to the region. thanks, everybody. >> coming up tonight on c-span, at 8:00 eastern, a discussion on free speech and campaign spending. among those we will hear from, a lawyer and an executive who works for the koch brothers. 10:00, bernie sanders announcing he is running for president as a democrat, becoming the first challenger to hillary clinton for the democratic nomination. right now, one of our conversations with freshman lawmakers. we will talk with bonnie watson:, the first black woman to represent new jersey and commerce -- in congress.

>> congresswoman bonnie watson coleman, what do you think of your time in washington? rep. watson-coleman: exhilarating and frustrating. it has been a great learning curve. it is so wonderful to be in the midst of all this activity and all the important policy initiatives, discussions taking place that impact people throughout my country. bill: you come from a background of having served in new jersey legislature. was it easy to transition with staff and issues from that setting to capitol hill? rep. watson-coleman: to the extent i knew i needed certain kinds of staff and what their function would be. that was a pretty easy transition. but the experience here is very different than state government. in state government, you had a predictable committee

predictable voting schedule. everyone was on the floor when you are voting, debating issues. it is very different down here. you were never called out of a committee meeting or out of a meeting in devoting. then go back to your committee meeting and resume your duty. the rhythm is very different. bill: is that rhythm hard to get used to? rep. watson-coleman: no, actually it is kind of exciting. you really do not know all the time what is going to come next. your senses are heightened. you are ready to move quickly. you know you have to be prepared in a shorter period of time. you are always in the midst of finding out what you are going to do next. what it is, what it means. all of that. it is really quite exciting and interesting. bill: we are taking the conversation in a studio in the capital. you came over here by one of the tunnels. before you started, you said your experience working here has

been a constant tunnel. explain that a bit. rep. watson-coleman: a lot of times, we move from office buildings to the capital. become underground through tunnels. everything around you is about the work you are doing down here. i mentioned i feel sometimes i am going to the tunnel and feeling i am in a tunnel. because my whole existence is about being here as a legislator in congress, dealing with people on their issues, dealing on the floor with our issues, looking at legislation. becoming part of a caucus. raising our issues things of that nature. everything i am doing is about being here. bill: has it been hard to make the transition personally from being able to go home in the evening after a session as opposed to staying in washington? rep. watson-coleman: i am fortunate that my husband is principally retired and a

part-time pastor of a church. he is with me a lot when i come home at the end of the evening to our tiny apartment. he is there. i get a chance to have consistency in my life. bill: you also brought from your office a picture that hangs in your office. we obviously do not do this recording in your office. let me see the picture. rep. watson-coleman: it is my father. i am one of four, the only girl. i was a daddy's girl. my father served in the legislature, and i ended up taking his seat. bill: how long did he serve? rep. watson-coleman: 12 years. bill: what does it say to you when you see your dad's picture each day? rep. watson-coleman: i was raised to be a public servant. my father and mother taught us to give as much as required.

do what you have to do, do it to the best of your ability, and be honest in all things. bill: i read a profile of you that said you were a activist legislator or wanted to be in washington. what does that mean? rep. watson-coleman: i believe strongly in issues. a woman's right to choose, the civil rights movement. i believe in equal voting rights. i believe in access to affordable health care. i recognize the importance of immigration to the economy. i am very supportive of, in order for everyone to prosper we need to concentrate on middle-class values. i am supportive of unions. i have always been sort of outspoken. i have addressed issues that did not necessarily have a strong voice. i have taken those issues on. that, with things i have done,

given individuals alternatives to incarceration, the mass incarceration we have engaged in , those issues are perceived as activism issues. i guess that makes me an activist. bill: as we talk, i see you have introduced your first bill in congress, dealing with online ammunition sales. take us through the process. why that issue? how did it develop and how do you move that forward? rep. watson-coleman: it is not my first piece of legislation. but the bill basically makes it difficult or impossible to purchase ammunition anonymously. if you purchase ammunition online, you have to go and secure it through a licensed dealer and show identification. in addition to that, if someone

is purchasing more than 1000 rounds of ammunition in a short period of time, five days, the licensed dealer has a responsibility to report it to the attorney general. gives you a chance to look into the issues before they become another tragedy. so i worked on gun legislation in legislature. it is very important that we reduce access to guns and ammunition, not necessarily for sportsmanlike activities or hunters. i come from a family of hunters. i know not to mess with their rifles or bow and arrow. but we have a society that is very dangerous. because ammunition and guns get into the hands of the wrong people. coming here and looking at areas i could move into, sort of extend what i did in new jersey, this is a natural evolution of

who i have been and who i want to be. bill: how do you move the bill forward? how do you and your staff move it forward? rep. watson-coleman: we are trying to get as many people to sign on as cosponsors. the have about 28 now. it is brand-new. we had a conference in the district yesterday. we reached out to organizations that are interested, million moms march, these coalitions, as well as community activists, so they can reach out to various networks. they will be asked to reach out to legislators across the country and get them on board. we have to build up a sense of willingness that this is an important piece of legislation, we can approach it from a bipartisan perspective. it is a bipartisan issue because the tragedies that have happened with mass killings, they do not care whether or not you are in an urban environment, democratic

environment, republican environment, or a rural environment. this is something i think we can all coalesce around and realize the value in limiting the access anonymously to people who want to purchase ammunition. bill: what is a typical day like for you in the house? rep. watson-coleman: typical day, you can start with him -- a caucus meeting or a reception in the morning. or a meeting that is off-site. it would involve a series of meetings in your office. you will be called out to committee meetings. at some point, you will be interrupted during that period. you will come over to the house floor and vote. you will be there for a series of votes. you will go back and either resume a committee meeting or meetings in your office. you will go back again over to

the floor to vote again. from there, you either go to a caucus meeting or you go to a reception or after-hours meeting. bill: how late is your day going? rep. watson-coleman: i get home around 9:00 or so at night 10:00, maybe. sometimes it :00 8:30. bill: what keeps you on schedule? rep. watson-coleman: i have an incredible staff. i have a scheduler that creates the schedule. i have the chief of staff and my legislative director, who i work closely with. i'm working with my communications director, who always finds an opportunity for me to reach out. i have a really great staff. bill: how is your relationship and communication with democratic leadership? rep. watson-coleman: i think i have a good relationship and a very strong communication with them. i am new, not necessarily their priority. but i certainly embrace our

desire to work for working-class families and elevate and protect those most honorable. i think that is who we are as dennett -- democrats. and i am very comfortable with the direction in which we are being led. bill: different scenario from new jersey legislation and that the majority in the house is republican. how well do you get along across the aisle? rep. watson-coleman: in new jersey legislature, i was in the minority. then when i was the majority leader in the legislature, i had to work with republicans. i think i have old friends here, like leonard lance. i have not had the opportunity to meet a lot of new legislators in the republican conference. because we do not get to interact except for the committees we are on. bill: does it help to have the

new jersey delegation republican or democratic, help guide you through inns and outs of capitol hill and the house? rep. watson-coleman: i have relied on mr. payne in particular. yes introduced me to places and people, helping me when i am lost in between buildings. in general, i look to other colleagues. they may not know me as well but they have been here longer. they are very open and supportive of new members. and that is good. bill: you are the first african-american woman to represent new jersey. what does that mean for you personally and the broader community in new jersey you represent? rep. watson-coleman: for me, it means i am the congress representative to women who feel we have not had a congress representative for a very long time.

in my district and out of my district, i am going to women's organizations and trying to help women candidates. it is the same thing with african-americans. new jersey has senator booker, congressman payne, and myself. we have a responsibility to uphold the cause and issues for people like us all over new jersey as well as representing everybody in our district. it means i get called to sussex county or coverlet county -- cumberland county to meet with a women's group or african-american group in addition to the things in my district. bill: the 12th district is generally trenton? rep. watson-coleman: mercer to middlesex and union. a pretty decent district. bill: you mentioned your dad's service in state legislature. when, where, and why did you get

involved in public service? rep. watson-coleman: i have always been involved in public service. i was a career state employee in the executive branch for 28 years before i decided to run for my father's seat. my father always wanted my brother or me to take on this position. we always told him no, you compromise our anonymity. but when he died, it was a way of honoring him and the work he had done. we told my father that was his ministry. when he died, his seat became available. he had already retired, but the person who was in the seat was moving to the senate. so it just seemed to be the right time. and i decided i would do it. i did it and had a wonderful experience serving the 15th legislative district. bill: how long did you serve in

the statehouse? rep. watson-coleman: 16 years. bill: back to your district for a second, you spoke geographically where it is. what is it like? what is the typical constituent like? rep. watson-coleman: i probably have the most diverse district in new jersey, maybe the country. predominantly white, nonminority. it has a strong south asian population. black population, latino population. it has very low socioeconomic municipalities. to very wealthy. it is basically an educated district and a working-class district. i go from trenton to princeton to plainfield to old bridge and south brunswick. bill: what is some of the

typical requests that come up for constituents that are addressed on the hill or back at your district office? rep. watson-coleman: i have a large senior population concentrated in the communities that had been built for seniors. so social security and do not mess with medicare. it is education, access to good public education, and affordable higher education. it is jobs, jobs, jobs. and training and jobs. and in other communities, it is about those all those things and public safety on top of it. bill: tell me about a constituent that had an issue addressed that you thought, i am glad i am in the position to do this. rep. watson-coleman: we have had constituents that have had problems with immigration. we have been able to sort of

pull it out of the system and straighten it out for them. we have a very large immigration population in my district. so that has been something we have been very proud of. we have very strong caseloads in the district. for people who have questions and concerns. bill: what would you like to accomplish in the house? rep. watson-coleman: i would like to help the house become a majority controlled democrat so we can get back to the work of protecting working families and ensuring we have the safety nets needed for those in greatest need, whether it is the elderly or our children. i would like to make sure that we are a progressive nation that we have been, that we protect and respect a woman's right to choose. that we will ensure there is unfettered access to voting. that is what i would like to accomplish. bill: how long do you plan to serve? and do you believe in term limits? rep. watson-coleman: i believe

the terms are limited by the people voting for you or not voting for you. from that perspective, that is my answer to that. how long i will serve is dependent upon what god has for me and what the constituents and voters of the congressional district have for me. bill: you mentioned your husband is retired. you are here in washington during the work week. what is it like when you are back in the district on the weekend? rep. watson-coleman: i go to a lot of events, try to have meetings with constituents that cannot make it down to washington. i meet with groups. i just try to make sure that i am seen in the community and accessible to those supporting me. those looking to support me in washington. bill: does the work you do here in terms of the issues you take on, exponentially harder than the work in the legislature in new jersey? rep. watson-coleman: it is different in the sense that it

has a national and international focus. i was not involved in homeland security when i was in state legislature. that is the committee i am on here. obviously, i'm looking broadly into what is happening around the world and how it affects homeland security. but basically, it is -- the issues are the same. they may be looked at differently. the role of federal government may be different in them in supporting states to a couple should these things -- accomplish these things. there are environmental issues. it is employment. it is civil rights. it is union rights. all those things. access to health care. affordability of health care and education. bill: what surprised you the most since your swearing in in january?

rep. watson-coleman: my republican colleagues refusing to let go of issues that have already been won such as a woman's right to choose, or being singularly focused on immigration from the southern border perspective as opposed to internationally. things of that nature. our refusal to move beyond those issues. bill: i want to ask you -- your day-to-day routine on capitol hill -- what do you like the most and the least? of the things you have to do day in, day out? rep. watson-coleman: i like the movement. i like moving from one thing to the next. i like the excitement of it. i probably like least being taken away from a committee meeting and having to leave and come back. get that momentum back. bill: after a vote or something? rep. watson-coleman: yeah, yeah. i am sometimes frustrated about

voting on procedural issues or having to push back on issues that have already been addressed. the other day, we were looking at interfering with a woman's right to choose. every other day, there is some negative immigration legislation or every other day we are fighting to make sure that people have greater access to affordable health care not reduced access to affordable health care. so probably dealing with those issues over and over and over again is probably that which i like the least. bill: thanks for being with us. quick some unfinished is this in this recess period reflected in this headline. they say president obama