the united states. or at least a systemic policy in the united states and many other countries, most other countries do as well. >> and one final question. n 2008, the fed began paying interest on reserves. in the seven years since then do you know how much janet yellen: it has been set at 25 basis points. i don't have the exact numbers. . i want to say it is a critically important tool of monetary policy. alls a tool that almost advanced countries, central and rely on as a key tool of monetary policy. ted cruz: what has been the

impact of paying those banks billions of dollars? thank you. >> a lot of turmoil in china. there was an earlier discussion about foreign markets being part of how we judge our growth. devaluing their currency. i could go on on things you know better than i. you see as the stability of the chinese market and how does that impact us? yellen: china has grown rapidly for a long period of time.

years, they have been for reasons trend that are entirely understandable. growth,abor force reduction in the case of investment growth, a desire that they have which is in their own interest and one that we share that their economy rebounds from the heavy dependence on the source of trade. as they have moved toward the technological frontier, further progress in adopting technological changes. blacks are they truly attempting to increase the mystic consumption -- domestic consumption? rhetoric's are saying they

are attempting to increase domestic consumption. the policies don't seem to reflect the readily -- rhetoric. my impression is they are trying to rebounds the economy. consumer spending is a smaller share of their economy then --sumer spending is an hours than ours. it has been growing rapidly. they are trying to boost it. i believe the course they are on is in their own best interest and we would agree. subjects, by the way, you feel the turmoil we are currently seeing in the threat devaluet the value -- their currency, you don't feel like that threatens our economy.

they are attempting to game it by increasing their exports and devaluing their currency, etc. beir yellen: when they may decision to devalue by a couple percent. to put that in context, remember that the u.s. dollar has been rising, appreciating significantly over the last year and a half. the chinese currency has been linked to the u.s. dollar. during that. the chinese currency had been strengthening substantially relative to many of its trade partners. adjustments oft their exchange rate in a way that was arguably not well communicated and proved

disruptive. they saw large capital outflows. i think they recognize that stability of their exchange rate is in their best interest. they would ultimately like to move to a more market-based and flexible system of exchange rate determination. >> i wish you were there central banker. i hope you are right. secondly, in january of this year, the economy actually slowed. growth became negative. it is attributed to a slowdown in the energy market because oil prices have fallen so energy states that have produced a lot of jobs -- by the way, jobs for those lower income, less skilled workers which we have spoke of, -- that as if that so fell, oil production rose for a brady of reasons. now oil production is decreasing once more. rig counts are falling. my state has been impacted by this. thisomments on how

shedding of jobs and the expiration and production component of the energy industry is going to impact our economy? yellen: we have seen a huge decline in oil prices for reasons pertaining to huge increases in supply and swelling and demand -- sold -- slowing in demand. it has had an enormous impact on drilling activity, jobs in that sector. the fed has been holding back growth. >> even though we have had benefits of spending in terms of employment, going forward, what impact does i have on our growth? i am struck that your forecast is that the economy will continue to grow at this 2.5% rate, not the 3.5% we had under reagan and clinton, but this

2.5%. if we are shutting all of these jobs and -- in the industry which provides a tremendous number of jobs for less skilled workers, it seems as if that endangers this 2.5% we have. chair yellen: member we are creating so many jobs a year. >> i was told it takes so many jobs a month to bring back those in employment who are unemployed. because our labor participation market is so low, for those newer workers who are entering the market, to employ them, as well as to maintain current employment for those currently, something i read speaks of those 20-25-year-old workers being underemployed. a higher rate of unemployment among those. all of this to say, to a new 10,000 a month, is that adequate

-- to account for those newly entering? yellen: to provide jobs for those entering the labor force requires 100,000 jobs per month. there is a downward trend in the .abor force due to its aging if labor force participation is stable, that helps to absorb people who are discouraged and have dropped out. quite a bitequires less than 200,000 or so jobs. >> in terms of increasing back -- our labor market participation is as low as it has been since jimmy carter. whenever the president speaks about how the unemployment rate is, our labor participation is low as it has been since jimmy carter. my question is how do we increase labor participation as

well as take care of those who are entering? we don't seem to be a call pushing that with 210,000 per month labor growth. -- we don't seem to be accomplishing. yellen: we are on the path of decreasing labor participation due to the aging population. i don't think we should expect to see labor force participation move up a great deal over time. if it were simple he stable over stable over time rather than declining, we would be absorbing people who are in aps discouraged and stronger job market, would move back. 200,000 jobs a month is enough to make progress on those dimensions. >> i yield back, thank you. >> we have had the return of two of our team members of the

committee. we have time for both of you to ask her questions. >> when i was here earlier, you mentioned moderate growth in the economy. earlier this week, economists at citigroup predicted not only a tightening of the u.s. market would force the fed to increase short-term markets interest rates more rapidly to listen to the paid, they said it would -- than it was anticipated, they said it would result in an inverted yield curve which resulted in a recession. economists said they would sign a 65% likelihood of a recession in the united states 2016. 65% seems high to me, but i am not an economist or the fed a

chair. what would you assign a risk level of a recession? chair yellen: i don't have the but decision on the part of the fomc to increase rates would only occur in the context where the committee believes we were going to enjoy at least somewhat above trend growth so that we would see an improvement in the labor market. uncertainty that pertains to the economic outlook. there are always shocks that occurred. sides,ks are on both faster and slower growth. i can't put a number on the risk of a recession, but i absolutely wouldn't see it as anything approaching 65%.

assuming you do or don't do something with respect to interest rates, everybody would agree that regardless of what you do, historically speaking interest rates would still remain at historically low levels. what tools would you have -- what tools with the fed have if wered economists at citi right and the u.s. to go into a recession? tot would you have mitigate the problem? chair yellen: we have all of the tools we have previously used to combat a recession. first of all, we would have the possibility of lowering rates. markets ino determining longer-term yields is expectations about the future

.ath of policy for a number of years after , we discussedzero the reasons we thought it would be appropriate to keep rates at low levels. as it turns out, seven years with zero rates, we discussed why we thought we would be keeping rates at low levels for a long time. as the market absorb the notion that they will stay low for a long time, longer-term yields came down. course, we had asset purchases, we undertook substantial asset purchases in order to simulate the economy -- stimulate the economy. i think those purchases were successful in conjunction with that forward guidance and bringing down longer-term rates. those tools are still available. >> last question. i met with a group of ohio bankers yesterday.

in december, they brought up to me the committee on banking supervision is planning to finalize new rules. the banks are required to hold against there charting -- assets.book access -- we understand the current proposal could have a negative impact on the financial market liquidity, increasing farming costs for americans and american businesses. by some estimates, they told me to regulatory changes proposed by the committee would increase mortgage and auto loans by 1.5% and home runs in america by as -- six pointer present. i am a former realtor. that number popped out to me as a huge problem. concerns that the borrowing rules would make it more expensive in ohio as well as across the country. does the fed support the vessel

theittee finalizing proposal before these concerns are addressed and will you be conducting your own cost-benefit analysis of what the impact the rules would have in the country? chair yellen: the fed is taking part in those discussions as other regulators. i am not aware there are any capital requirements. i am not aware of any thought of changing those requirements in the manner that would have the kind of impact you are discussing. we can try to get back to you on that. >> thank you, chairman, my time has expired. chair, how are you? because i promised my team, we want to extend a thank you to your staff and team for tolerating our technical written questions and some of the responses. it is appreciated.

some of them are lengthy in nature. can i take us a different direction? i am blessed to sit on financial services so we get to cross each other's past often. often.s the indexes and economists who are saying there beentrong -- our team has collecting information about worldwide debt. does that cause fragility in north america? numbers in the last nine years, developing countries, 57 trillion in new debt which has doubled their gdp growth. worldwide debt is 300% of gdp. how do you, from a policy with future interest rates adjustments, the affects

that will have on u.s. currency at the same time with developing country debt -- i won't call it crisis -- but debt stress on the horizon? how does that affect your decision making and does it provide any fragility to our economic growth? or even potential recession threats? chair yellen: it is something we take account of as we try to evaluate the global environment and the likely impact it could have on the united states. it is something we look at as well as part of our financial monitoring to try to determine whether there are risks that could impact financial stability in the united states. engage ine fed certain bilateral agreements with some of the developing countries?

reserve banks to wall off the cascade effect? those of us who remember the tequila crisis. what and occupations -- inoculations does the fed engage in? chair yellen: the fed has swap agreements with a small number centralced country's banks where we think it is important to make sure that banks doing dollar-based business have access to adequate liquidity. we have no swap arrangements with emerging market countries. the only reason we engage in those swap market arrangements is to essentially protects financial stability in the united states. i don't know the word to use, indemnification -- >> i was trying to find a word, not jewish and -- inoculations

chair yellen:. these are risks when you look at financial markets. when you talk about debt, what has been discussed over the last year or so, the fact that private companies in many emerging markets have taken on dollar-denominated debt. systems,is the banking the financial sectors of those emerging markets have been much more carefully regulated in recent years and are less vulnerable. they have themselves denominated dollar short-term debt. company corporations in these largeies have taken on a quantity of debt. >> to you see any large cascade risk in developing countries in sovereign debt loads and private debt loads in those countries that would affect our economy?

chair yellen: it is a risk that we monitor. itould not at this point say is a very serious risk to the u.s. financial system. >> this is not meant to be a one were attion, but we data about a month ago. we will call it dollar-euro contracts. the movement away from their being settled in new york. some of that is because of regulatory situations. they were not being settled under our regulatory environment. does that movement of all or denominated contracts -- dollar-denominated contracts being settled overseas have any threat or difficulty to the federal reserve's ability to see regulatoryfluence movement of those resources?

chair yellen: i am not aware of such a trend, but i will try to look at that and get back to you. >> that is one of those technical written questions. i yield back. members --o a four inform members the chair has a need to leave at noon. we want to honor that. i just talked to the vice chair and she agrees. i want to give everybody a chance to get a question. could we limit it to one question and keep it to 2-3 minutes so that everybody has an opportunity to do that before we run out of time? >> thank you, ranking number of maloney -- ranking member of maloney. thank you for being here. based on the commentary i've heard from colleagues in the media climbing the federal reserve overreaches in its ability to invest in interest rates. it is not clear the most

important factors the fed will set interest rates based on what is called the equilibrium real interest rate which has been consistently low, maybe even below zero. given the equilibrium rate is close to zero, what has not been receiving enough attention is how fiscal policy should play an increasing role in stimulating demand and providing an update to the economy. since the federal reserve has limited tools on how it can their monetarys policy including adjusting interest rates and implement in quantitative easing or forward guidance, can you speak to the impact that fiscal policy, ofticularly -- the lack support for certain tax expenditures, even financial moves as the expert-import banks have had on the rate of recovery for our economy? chair yellen: generally, there is evidence that the so-called equilibrium rate, a real rate of

interest, adjusted rate of interest, fell sharply after the financial crisis and remains quite depressed. believefactor that we that even when we start raising rates, those rate increases will be gradual. general, when this rate comes down, it means that rates are likely to be lower than the historical norm. to the extent that we are operating in a low, even positive interest rate environment. if the economy is hit by negative shocks, we have tools we can use. our most sure and certain instrument policy is the fed funds rate.

when the average level of the fed's fund rate is low, we have less room to respond to negative shocks. it would be helpful to be in an environment and give us more scope to be stimulating the economy, responding to adverse shocks if the average level of interest rates were somewhat higher. i don't want to give you advice on fiscal policy. that is up to you. fiscal policytive is something that would, in a sense, enable the fed on average ratese a higher level of and have more scope to respond to negative shocks. >> i yield back. >> thank you so much. haveecent fomc productions

a run on unemployment of four point &, close to what we were taught was maximum unemployment. -- 4.9%. ,he broader market they use does that count those who recently give up for work or part-time for economic reasons for that wrote -- that rose in october. that is average -- that is higher than the last average from 2001-2007. there is still considerable slack in the labor market. how important are the labor tools? given the considerable slack suggested, is this the right time to raise rates? chair yellen: i would agree with u6 remains elevated relative to it to stork norms. higher than i would expect a based on historical experience given the standard we are used

to. it is one of the things that leads me to believe that even though we are close to that 4.9% median, there remains a marginal slack in the labor market. thatportant part of u6 makes it that high is an -- isary -- is going to voluntary part-time employment. while that has come down substantially, it is hard to tell for sure because there is a trend over time toward more part-time employment in the u.s. economy. i believe it remains higher than it ought to be in a so-called full employment economy. in addition, as you noted, there are discouraged workers. a fair number of them, that has come down. i see margins of slack. i think they are reflected in the discrepancy in u6.

>> thank you, mr. chair. thank you chair yellen for being here. i appreciate your patience. this is along the achaemenid of cumulativelong the a impact. i am thinking of the recent adoption of the surcharges and the total loss absorbing capacity. can you describe a little bit what all of these changes mean on a qubit of -- on a cumulative aces on the industry and the economy? -- cost-benefit analysis have you done or has it been talked about or doing a more comprehensive cost-benefit analysis of what all the regulations due to the industry and economy? i am thinking from the regulatory rulebook, a constant state of revision for the last six years. maybe describe that a little bit.

can you see any benefit of causing the process -- pausing the process to see what affects those regulations are having on the economy? chair yellen: i think it is having an important impact on the economy. my assessment be the most important impact it has had is to make the banking system and the financial system more anddly safer and sounder less crisis prone than it was prior to the financial crisis. you described two regulations, t the long-term debt requirement we proposed recently. you also mentioned capital surcharges. it is important to understand that those regulations only apply to the eight largest systemically important banks. in our regulations we are trying

to make sure that community systemic aree not not responsible for the financial crisis, are not going to be hit with all of those regulations. i think it is critically important that the very largest, most systemic organizations need to be safer and sounder. they need more capital, they need more liquidity. congress told us that they need -- in the event they encounter , weiculties or insolvency need to be able to resolve those institutions. we don't want those taxpayers mailing out those institutions again. the surcharges, higher capital standards means they are much less likely to fail. it gives an advantage to medium and smaller sized institutions

or to the extent it burdens them by competing away their business, that is safer. if they need to be resolved, that loss observance he is going to be something that is very important that would enable their resolution, either under title ii or the bankruptcy code, so i think that there are some cost associated with these parts of it,nd on we have done significant cost benefit analysis, but there is a huge benefit and according to one estimate, the cost to the u.s. of the financial crisis probably amounted to $16 trillion. having a safer and sounder financial system by having more capital and liquidity and result ability is a net benefit.

>> thank you. >> thank you congressman grossman. about this question has not been asked before. your two publicly stated mandates are price stability and full employment. we have a to remember lot of safety net programs and a lot of people feel that we are not going to achieve any better than where we are at, 4.9, because the safety nets are so generous, people are either not looking or working part-time. right now, price stability and full employment are supposedly where you want to be. we appear to be for price ability and full employment and the banking system has recovered, can you could you explain to

you continue to maintain a 0% interest rate given that it appears we are at full of 1 -- employment and that the banks are stable? >> i would say that inflation is running close to maximum inflation isn -- running below the 2% objective and we certainly want to see that changed. the economy as, and the sense you described, doing well and that is the reason it is a live option for us is to discuss whether or not it is appropriate to raise rates. we do have to ask the question, what is this so-called neutral rate at which the economy would continue to operate near full employment and approach price

stability? a good deal of research, and i discussed this in a speech i gave yesterday, suggests that the neutral rate of interest is very much where it has been historically, close to zero with present, so the level of interest rates that would support a continuation of these desirable trends is probably low. of course, when we were recovering from the great recession with high unemployment , to stimulate all the job creation we had, we had to keep interest rates at very low levels. we are contemplating raising them, but we've said that we expect that process to be gradual and we want to make sure that having achieved this

progress in the labor market, we maintain it and do not put it in danger. you mean my whole lifetime, when older people put money in the bank and they were getting it 4%, 5%, we did not know but we were putting unnecessary drag on the economy? >> we had a different economy then, and many things are different domestically and globally. depend onof returns the strength of investment demand, the strength of demand or borrowing the funds that savers are trying to provide. economy where in some sense, there is a great deal of savings relative to the demand for those bonds -- funds. that is a market force that shapes the reality that the federal reserve operates in and

conditions our ability to set rates that will be consistent with the attainment of congres'' space objectives -- objectives. a huge demand for those funds, interest rates would be up to the levels that were more accustomed to having experience historically, but the demand for those funds is simply generate aenough to level of interest rates that is more historically normal. >> thank you. i want to say that i think that this has been a very constructive and timely hearing. we have a common goal, the

congress of the u.s., along with the executive print and the federal reserve. that common goal is to enact and diplomat sound policies that thatve a dynamic economy provides meaningful employment, not only for our generation but for future generations. the more we can work together and the more we can share how we get to those common goals and pass that on to future , that is clearly a goal that has to be pursued with a lot of passion and intellect. you provide both, so we thank you for that. with that, the hearing is adjourned.

>> today, a wilson center discussion on the government security clearance process with the intelligence officers that previously worked for the bush, clinton and obama administrations. >> all persons having business before the honorable supreme court of the united states will give their attention. >> tonight, on c-span's landmark cases, we look at the case of baker versus karn, a 1952 decision that ruled federal courts can intercede disputes over drawing of election districts. the chief justice called it the most important case of his tenure on the court. voterse 11 tennessee

lived in five of the largest cities in tennessee. victims ofe intended a statutory scheme which devalues, reduces their right to vote to about one 20th of the value of the vote given to certain rural residents. >> by the early 20th century, population shift in states like tennessee had a majority of voters from rural areas moved to the city. getet those rural districts voting power equal to the urban districts, a group of -- challenged the disparity in their case all the way to the supreme court. carr.of baker v. joining us in the discussion, it smith,o in and douglas

author of on democracy's doorstep, the inside story of how this in court brought one person one vote to the u.s. nights live tonight at but eastern on c-span, c-span3 -- that is live onight at 9:00 p.m. eastern c-span, c-span3 and c-span radio. tonight, on the communicators, terrorism and the use of social media. we will examine how social media is used by various terrorism groups to radicalize and recruit new members from around the world. we are joined by alberto andandez, vice president -- mark wallace, ceo of the counter extremism project. both recently testified at a house oversight committee meeting. >> if you look at the world and

the production of media, worldwide, if you look at hollywood and medicine avenue, you will know that there is more about than there are of them. if you look at the narrow space where people are searching for this type of stuff, this some this, this subculture, needs, they radically outnumber everyone else, sending a different message. i think that we are to have a rope dust -- have a robust discussion in the u.s. they have to put policies and procedures in place, a lot of which we have proposed, that limit and deny the ability of terrorists to use these platforms. we have to have a robust discussion at some point, to these platforms become material to support these terrorist groups?

>> what's the communicators tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span two. in a primetime national security address the nation, president obama discussed the nasa -- the mass shootings at san bernardino and his plans to defeat isis. he talked about counterterrorism strategies. establishing stronger screening procedures for those coming here without a visa. this is almost 15 minutes. pres. obama: it evening. -- good evening. on wednesday, 14 americans were killed as they came together to celebrate the holidays. they were taken from family and friends. they were white and black, latino and asian. immigrants and american-born. moms and dads, daughters and sons.

each of them served their fellow citizens and all of them were part of the american family. tonight, i want to talk about this tragedy, the broader threat of terrorism and how we can keep our country safe. that the eye is still gathering the facts about what happened in san bernardino, but here is what we know. the victims were brutally murdered and injured by one of their coworkers and his wife. no evidence that the killers were directed by a terrorist organization overseas or that they were part of a broader conspiracy here at home. the two of them had gone down the dark path of radicalization, embracing a perverted interpretation of islamic calls for war against the west. they stockpiled assault weapons, ammunition and i've bombs. pipe bombs.type -- our nation has been at war with

terrorism since al qaeda cure nobody -- jill kelley 3000 americans on 9/11. in the process, we have hardened our defenses. intelligence and law-enforcement agencies have disrupted countless plots year-end overseas and worked around the clock to keep us safe. our military and counterterrorism professionals have prevented count -- terrorism overseas, disrupting safe havens in several countries , decimating -- decimating al qaeda's leadership. for the last few years, the terrorist threat has evolved into a new face. as we have become better at preventing complex multifaceted severuslike 9/11, turned to less complicated acts of violence like the mass shootings that are all too common in our society. it is this type of attack that

we saw in fort hood in 2009, in chattanooga earlier this year and now in san bernardino. grewoups like i sold stronger -- as groups like isis grew stronger in countries like iraq, we see growing efforts by terrorist to poison the minds of people like the boston marathon bombers and the san bernardino killers. for seven years, i have confronted this evolving threat each and every morning in my intelligence briefing. took thisday i office, i have authorized u.s. forces to take out terrorist abroad precisely because i know how real the danger is. as commander in i have no greater responsibility than the security of the american people. a father of those coat young daughters, i know that we see ourselves with friends and at a holiday party like the one in san bernardino.

we see our kids in the faces of the young people killed in paris. i know that after so much war, many americans are asking whether we are confronted by a cancer that has no immediate cure. here's what i want you to know. the threat from terrorism is real, but we will overcome it. -- isisdestroy i sold and any other organization that tries to harm us. toughsful not depend on talk or abandoning our values or giving in to fear. that is what groups like isis are a hoping for -- are hoping for. we will prevail by being strong and smart, resilient and relentless, and drawing upon every aspect of american power. here is how. first, our military will continue to hunt down terrorist plotters in any country where it is necessary. in iraq and syria, airstrikes are taking out isis leaders,

heavy weapons, oil tankers, infrastructure. since the attacks in paris, our closest allies, including rants, germany and the u.k. have ramped up their contributions to our campaign which will help us accelerate our effort to destroy isis. continue toill provide training and equipment to tens of thousands of iraqi and syrian forces pricing -- fighting isis on the ground so we take away their safe havens. in both countries, we are deploying special operations forces that can accelerate that offensive. we have stepped up that effort since the attacks in paris and will continue to invest more in approaches that are working on the ground. third, we are working with friends and allies to stop isis operations and disrupt lots, cut off their financing and prevent them from recruiting more fighters. since the attacks in paris, we have surged -- search intelligence sharing with our european allies. we are working with turkey to

seal its border with syria and we are cooperating with muslim -- muslim majority countries and communities at home to counter the vicious i -- ideology that isis promotes online. fourth, with american leadership, the international community has begun to establish a process and timeline to pursue cease-fires and a political resolution to the syrian war. doing so will allow the syrian to focus every country on the common goal of destroying isis, a group that threatens us all. this is our strategy to destroy isis. it is designed and supported by our military commanders and counterterrorism experts. together with 65 countries that have joined an american-led coalition. examine oury strategy to determine when additional steps are needed to get the job done.

that is why i ordered the department of state and homeland the visato review waiver program under which the female terrorist in san bernardino originally came to this country. that is why i will urge high-tech and law-enforcement leaders to make it harder for terrorists to use technology to escape justice. here at home, we have to work together to address the challenge. there are several steps that congress should take right away. to begin with, congress should act to make sure that no one on a no-fly list is able to buy a gun. what could possibly be the argument for allowing a terrorist suspect to buy a semiautomatic weapon? this is a matter of national security. we need to make it harder for people to buy powerful assault weapons like the ones used in san bernardino. i know there are some who reject any gun safety measures, but the fact is that our intelligence and law enforcement agencies, no matter how effective they are,

cannot identify every would-be mass shooter, whether the individual is motivated by isis or some other hateful ideology. what we can do and must do is make it harder for them to kill. should put in place stronger screening for those who come to america without a visa so that we can take a hard look at whether they have traveled to war zones. we are working with members of both parties in congress to do that. believes,f congress as i do, that we are at war with isis, it should go ahead and vote to authorize the continued use of military force against these terrorists. year, i have ordered our military to take thousands of airstrikes against isis target. it's time for congress to vote to demonstrate that the american people are united and committed to this fight. my fellow americans, these are

the steps we can take together to defeat the terrorist threat. let me say a word about what we should not do. we should not be drawn into a long and costly ground war in iraq or syria. that is what groups like isis want. they know they can't defeat us on the battlefield. isis fighters were part of the insurgency we faced in iraq. they also know if we occupied foreign lands, they can maintain killingcies for years, thousands of our troops and draining our resources and using our presence to draw new recruits. the strategy that we are using airstrikes, special forces and working with local forces who are fighting to regain control of their own country, that is how we achieve a more sustainable victory. sending at require us new generation of americans overseas to fight and die for another decade on foreign soil.

here's what else we cannot do. we cannot turn against one another by letting this fight be defined as a war between america and islam. that is what groups like isis wants. isis does not speak for islam. they are thugs and killers, part of a cold of death. death.s -- cult of they account for a tiny fraction of the billions of muslims agree -- around the world, including the patriotic muslims of america that reject those ideals. more than half of terrorist victims around the world are muslim. into are to succeed defeating terrorism, we must enlist muslim communities as our strongest allies, rather than push them away. that does not mean denying the fact that an extremist ideology

has spread within some muslim communities. there is a real problem that muslims must confront without excuse. muslim leaders here and around the world have to continue working with us to decisively and unequivocally reject the hateful ideology that groups like isis and al qaeda amount -- promote. ofak out against acts violence and those interpretations of islam that are incompatible with the values of religious tolerance, which will respect and human dignity -- mutual respect and human dignity. just as it is the responsibility of muslims around the world to root out misguided ideas, it is the responsibility of all americans of every faith to reject discrimination. it is our responsibility to tests on who we should admit to this country. it is our responsibility to reject the idea that muslims should somehow be treated differently.

when we travel down that road, we lose. , thatind of divisiveness a trail of our values, it plays into the hands of groups like isis. friends and are our neighbors, coworkers, sports heroes. are our men and women in uniform were willing to die in defense of our country -- who are willing to die in defense of our country, we need to remember -- remember that. we will succeed in this mission because we are on the right side of history. we were founded upon a belief in human dignity, that no matter who you are or where you come from or what you look like or what religion you practice, you are equal in the eyes of god and equal in the eyes of the law. even in this political season, even as we properly debate what steps i and your presidents must

take to keep our country safe, let's make sure we never forget what makes us exceptional. let's not forget that freedom is more powerful than fear. we have always met challenges, whether war or depression, natural disasters or terrorist attacks, but coming together around our common ideals as one nation and one people. so long as we stay true to that tradition, i have no doubt that america will prevail. thank you, god bless you and may god bless the united states of america. >> reaction on twitter to the president speech, starting with republican presidential candidate lindsey graham.

>> next, live, your calls and comments on washington journal. at 10:00, intelligence experts on the government security clearance process. live at noon eastern, the house comes in for general business. >> all persons having businesses before the honorable supreme court of the united states give their attention. c-span's landmark

cases, we look at the case of , the 19thus carr feature decision that ruled that federal courts could -- chief justice warren called it the most important case of his tenure on the court. there is a portion of the oral argument. >> these 11 tennessee voters live in five of the largest cities in hennessy. --y are the intended and victims of a statutory scheme which the values, reduces their right to vote to about one 20th of the value of the vote given to certain rural residents. >> by the early 20th century, population shifts in state tennessee had a majority of voters from rural areas moving to the city. rural districts held voting power equal to the larger urban district. a group of voters from nashville, memphis and knoxville challenged the disparity and

took their case all the way to the supreme court. the case became a major milestone in supreme court activism and has continuing relevance today as the term, one person one vote is still being debated. join us -- joining us in the discussion, theodore olson and douglas smith. that is live tonight at nine a crock eastern on c-span radio -- at 9:00 eastern on c-span, c-span3, and c-span radio. >> this morning, new york times correspondent jonathan martin looks at the rise of donald trump and how the republican party establishment is responding. lorenzo that he, director

of the george washington ,niversity program on extremism details a report on isis supporters in america. washington journal is next. >> the threat from terrorism is real, that we will overcome it. -- but we will overcome it. obama last night in his third overall -- oval office address 10 -- attempting to calm a nervous nation. insisting that congress should pass a new authorization for military force against isis. we begin this morning with your calls, tweak and e-mails -- tweets and e-mails. republican style (202) 748-8001 -- republicans dial (202) 748-8001.