>> discussion about efforts to improve the government online service. mickey dickerson left google to hope -- to help health care.org. he described the disarray he found when he was first brought in. you just walk in as an engineer and a look at other engineers and see what they are doing, it was total insanity when you first looked. there were 55 different

companies contracted to work on different parts of health care.gov. that is a fairly complicated operation, but it ain't about complicated. conservatively, another piece of insanity, literally nobody knows how many people were called on to the project. it was at least hundreds. dozens of different buildings. not only did they not have any kind of habit or custom of working together, they were in most cases explicitly forbidden from communicating with each other because of the way contracts were managed in the government. the government reserved for itself the job record anything how it was going to go. -- the job coordinating how it was going to go. but they did not really have the skill set. [applause] -- [laughter]

what going -- what was going on made zero sense. >> tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. in a speech to the munich security congress earlier today, secretary john kerry criticized russia for its actions in ukraine and syria. other conference attendees from world powers are discussing how to and the civil war in syria -- to end the civil war in syria and address the humanitarian crisis. the secretary's remarks are about 40 minutes. >> john? if i could you but you to the podium. -- invite you to the podium. this is a particularly much important moment for us, and i hope for you too, because under

normal circumstances this might be the last time you speak here as a secretary of state. so welcome. we are very happy to have you. [applause] sec. kerry: thank you very much. wolfgang, thank you for reminding me-- [laughter] verything that i am doing now is-- depending on what i decide to do. so, maybe not. [laughter] [applause] really happy to be back in munich. i am very happy to share thoughts with this, the 52nd

edition of the security conference. 1963,k if you think back, the first year of the munich security conference, this forum has always been about the pursuit of peace. back then, here in germany, as elsewhere, the cold war actually felt pretty hot. the wall was a concrete indication of the new reality,. barbed wire was strong across the heart of the country. indeed, the heart of europe. and that was the year that president kennedy spoke in germany and is said -- and said to all who doubted, let them come to berlin. many of us here remember the starkness of that period of time very well.

i was a kid. my dad was a legal advisor to the high commissioner of germany in berlin. i was privileged to be dumped off at a school in switzerland. i did not know where i was at age 11-12. i saw firsthand what europe would like in those years emerging from the work. -- from the war. everything they talked about was the war and remnants of the war. i used to ride my bike down and see the churches and steeples and burn down reichstag. i knew very well what that was about. it is clear that while the cold war islam over, the need for the same qualities that brought people through that -- the courage and resolve in defending liberty and pursuing peace -- is absolutely is vital to date as it was half a century ago.

obviously everyone in this room doesn't need a secretary of , from great britain or germany, or anybody else to come in and give a long list of the litany crises we face. probably never in history have we been dealing with as many hotspots, as many failed or failing states, all at one time. not to mention a kim jong-un and a nuclear program and other challenges all at the same time. everybody here understands that. you would not be here otherwise. esh's campaign of terror extends its reach well beyond iraq and syria. the syrian civil war, which is now claimed more than 250,000 lives, still rages. we are facing -- we, together -- the greatest humanitarian crisis

in europe since world war ii. as innocent people, many of whom are women and children, are either trapped inside a country without access to medicine and food, or they have been forced to flee. and the flood of desperate migrants has now spread well beyond the middle east. as we know, 50% of the people now knocking on the door of europe with a whole industry that is been created to try and help move them. and some very perverse politics in a certain places that turns the dial up and down for political purposes. half of them now come from places other than syria. think about that. pakistan, bangladesh, afghanistan -- so the burdens of europe, which is already facing a complex economic political and social strain, is now even more

intense. i want to make it clear to all of you, we in the u.s. are not sitting across the pond thinking somehow we are a new. -- we are immune. we are not saying this is your problem, not ours no, this is our problem. that united states of america understands the near existential nature of this threat to the politics and fabric of life in europe. that is why we are joining now in enforcing a nato mission to close off a key access route. that is why we will join with you in other ways to stem this tide because of the potential of its damage to the fabric of the united europe. the truth is in that every decade since its founding, the e.u. has been tested by forces. internal and external. that benefited from a house

divided. we know many europeans right now feel overwhelmed by the latest round of challenges, including concerns about the u.k.'s potential exit from the eu. here again, however, i want to express the confidence of president obama and all of us in america. just as it has so many times before, europe is going to emerge stronger than ever. provided it stays united and builds common responses to these challenges. obviously the united states has a profound interest in your success, as we do in a very strong united kingdom stating in a strong e.u. [applause] let me underscore,

those that claim our transatlantic partnership is unraveling, or in fact those that hope it might unravel, could not be more wrong. they forget, or they never understood why we came together in the first place. not to just say along in the best of times -- sail along in the best of times, but to have each other's backs when the times were tough. they forget as well that the ties that bind us are not some kind of fragile strings of momentary convenience. they are rugged, time-tested cords of democratic values. liberty, decency, justice, rule of law. nowhere is that more clear than our joint, unwavering support for a democratic ukraine. -- european partners view partners deserve an enormous credit for the result and purpose you have summoned to stand up to russia's repeated

aggression. i am confident that europe and the united states will continue to stand united, both in sustaining sanctions for as long as they are necessary, a nd in providing necessary assistance to ukraine until its integrity i s protected by the full implementation of the manx agreement. we have made it clear. -- of the mengsk agreement. sanctions are not an end unto themselves. witness what we have succeeded in the context of the iran nuclear agreement. we should not forget why they were imposed in the first place. to stand up for ukraine's fundamental rights. rights of international norms that have been accepted ever since world war ii, that were part of what that great battle was about. russia has a simple choice. fully implement the agreement, or continue to face economically

damaging sanctions. the path to relief is clear -- withdraw weapons and troops, ensure that all ukrainian hostages are returned, allow full humanitarian assets -- humanitarian access to occupied territories, which by the way, is required by international law. there, ande, internationally -- free, fair and internationally monitored elections in ukraine, and restore ukraine's control of sight of the international border, which belongs to it. put plainly, russia can prove by its actions that it will respect ukraine's sovereignty, just as it insists on respect for its own. twohe same token, after difficult years, ukrainians still have work to do as well. president poroshenko who is here knows that and accepts that.

neither the people of ukraine or their partners believe that enough has happened in ukraine either. ukraine has responsibilities with respect to this agreement. it is critical that kiev "it and of the bargain. -- kiev upholds its end of the bargain. ukraine's democratic potential is far brighter than it wasn't several years ago when we met. for writer even then it was before the brave -- far brighter even than it was before the brave protests. 2016 has all the potential possible, all the groundwork laid through the good work of germany and france and of the normandy format and through the support of other countries, to be able to make 2016 a year that ukraine proves reform can triumph over corruption. we call on all of the countries elected leaders to demonstrate the unity and integrity that

their people are demanding. in addition to our joint focus on ukraine, the u.s. is significantly upgraded our commitment to european security. with a plan four fold increase in our spending on the european reassurance initiative. from just under $790 million to $3.4 billion. this will allow us to maintain a division's worth of equipment in europe, and additional combat great and -- combat in eastern and central europe, making us more visual and more tangible. that is not the only way we have to approach the challenge in europe and the rest of the world. millions of young people in countries do not have hope and food or jobs or education or a future. if we leave that unattended to,

then we are simply turning our backs on what we know is a responsibility for how we will stem the tide of violent extremism. we will continue to build on our unparalleled economic partnership. we will support new jobs and spur growth on both sides of the atlantic. and concluding negotiations on transatlantic trade, investment partnerships, this year will strengthen our economies. let me be absolutely clear, -- nothingttip requires europe to reduce or undo important regulations, or weaken existing standards. that is false. on the contrary, the agreement will underscore our support for the inclusion of high environmental and labor standards and its read agreements, just as we have done in the transpacific partnership, which encompasses 40% of the

planet's gdp. we have encompassed in that agreement, in the four corners of the agreement, the highest labor standards and highest environmental standards enforceable by law. dynamismshowcase the of our form of democracy, of our marketplace. the free markets, that demonstrate the preeminence in the global conversation about the economic standards and the defense of free trade. perhaps most urgently, the u.s. and europe are at the forefront of facing what is become the defining challenge of our generation. the fight against violent extremism. paris,rible attacks in brussels, beirut, sinai, san bernardino, and so many other places have only reinforced our determination to defeat daesh as

soon as possible. and i am absolutely convinced we will do just that. every day our military is meeting. every day the coalition is working. every day we are taking additional steps forward. and of the global counter-daesh coalition that we began some 70 months ago includes -- 17 month s ago includes every nato and e.u state. that is the very definition of solidarity. defeating daesh is not an overnight proposition. it's going to take time. but i will tell you this, president obama is determined that it will not take too much time. and he is every day pushing our military and every other sector -- and there are many other sectors involved in this broad 9 lines of effort -- she is pushing them to come up with new propositions, new ways to push this fight.

we welcome the announcement of countries in europe that of decided to join despite. -- that have decided to join despite. we are going to defeat daesh, i have no doubt about it. even as we do that, we have to do work on immeasurable -- do work on a measurable manner. first and foremost, we're going after their fighters. our coalition has launched more than 10,000 airstrikes. we, the united states, and france coupled with other countries, have put special forces on the ground in iraq and syria in order to better enable a number of operations whilst also providing increased amounts of training and equipment to our local partners. together, we have pushed terrorists out of about 40% of the territory that they once controlled in iraq. 20% in syria. we have liberated to treat --

liberated tikrit. returned toi have build their homes. an extraordinary story that does not get enough credit. we have liberated sinjar. h'sare hammering daes heavy weapons, it's training camps, supply routes, infrastructure. and it's terrorism and military campaign is expanding by the day. but it's not enough just to dock them down, militarily, which we are doing. you have to ensure that they cannot get back up. that is why the second line of the hurt we are pursuing is critical. -- line of effort we are pursuing is critical, destroying their economic lifeline. we have learned more about daesh's sources of income, which is let us target their oil production, refineries, tanker trucks, cash centers, elicited banking facilities. for daesh, lower revenues means

fewer resources to finance military action and the smaller paychecks to lure stain new fighters. already we are seeing the results of this. they have had to cut their paychecks by 50%. in some cases, they've had to cut it off entirely. they don't have the ability to continue this expansion. this also gives a boost to our third line of attack, which is to reduce the number of terrorist groups. because of tighter airport and order security, fewer terrorists are now getting into syria and iraq. in fact, because of lower pay and comes into danger -- constant danger, we know that more are trying to get out. meanwhile, with arab states in the lead, we are doing more every day to minimize the impact of terrorist propaganda. to fight back against daesh's apocalyptic distortion of islam

and its rhetoric. to prevent the incitement of the so-called lone wolf attacks. in the united states, we recently opened a global engagement center at the state department to help dispel extremist group's hateful lies in all forms of media to take the people who were once the captives and exploited by daesh, and put them in the media to tell the stories to deter others from joining. we have a center opened up in abu dhabi. we have a new center that the saudi's will be starting. we will be working with them. the malaysians are following. those who really can talk with authority about what islami -- islam means in the individual nation where it makes the difference will have the opportunity to speak in ways that they haven't yet. the global coalition has reinforced our commitment to the fifth effort, providing

humanitarian relief to the millions who have suffered at the hands of daesh. region is responding to this challenge, my friends. that is essential because the needs are absolutely staggering. some that were in london the other day. extraordinary contributions by countries to put $10 million on the table. turkey has taken in more than 2.5 million men, women, and children since the war began. in lebanon and jordan they are giving refuge to one million people each. in europe, you know better than anybody how the staggering humanitarian crisis is affecting and the of politics social fabric of europe. unprecedented challenges. and with characteristic resilience, i am proud to say, and grateful for the fact, that in europe is stepping up to meet

these challenges. chancellor merkel and other leaders have demonstrated remarkable courage. last night at dinner, i heard people telling me how it is difficult. that is the nature of political courage. across this continent, communities are taking in those that are fleeing violence and saying no to the voices of intolerance and racism within a society's. -- within societies. i know how difficult it is to live our values. it is hard. but we do try. it is one of the things that the binds us together. it brings us here to munich. our common commitment to those values, which in the end, make the difference in defining what life is really all about. [applause] the united states, we recognize that while this crisis is not as real on our shores on as a daily basis, we have a

moral obligation to stand with our partners and to do more and assist in the relief effort. that is why i was able to announce in london that we will contribute an additional $925 million to the already $4.5 billion we contributed to syrian refugees, making us, i think, the largest donor specifically to this plate. -- to this plight. providing emergency care, education, and job help. i think everybody understands, and this is the most important point. this is what motivated us to go to vienna twice, with all the great help of all of these partners here. almost came together in commonality with a recognition that writing checks is not going to solve the problem. we can't just endlessly be writing checks. we can't be endlessly fighting about whether someone is alive

or dead, or what's going to happen. we have to end this war. the only way to do that somehow to bring about the quickest possible political settlement. almost everybody has agreed that if all one side does is escalate, the other side will too. we can have an endless escalation between iran, syria, sunnis, saudi arabia, turkey, or in qatar, or in any country of his first. they have an ability to blow the support. -- any country of interest. ione country. it takes every country coming together in order to hold it together. lasted in syria has now for more than five years. with the success we had the other day at the table, does not yet show the signs we want of burning out.

that is why we are focused on this track. if the international community and syrians miss the opportunity to achieve that resolution, the violence, bloodshed, torture, the images of children and women, the bombing in anguish is going to continue. and all the talk that would take place here and has taken place to date will be nothing except an increase in the cynicism of people in the world, who look to their leaders to deliver. the tragedy is that if this flounders, the call to jihad will increase. that is why the diplomatic initiative we launched in vienna is so important. ssg includeser i every major country with a direct stake in syria. parties as diverse as i ran saudi arabia -- iran and saudi

arabia met at the table, constructively moving forward. they agreed on a list of unanimous principles reflected in the. these principles reflect the way toward a stable, sovereign, inclusive, united, nonsectarian syria that we all seek. but which the vast majority of people believe can never be assad atwith president its helm. you cannot stop the war that way. yesterday we made progress advancing two of the major components of the u.n.. u.n. resolution. the trucks are lined up. the permissions are being granted. they should flow today or tomorrow. in the wee hours of friday theing, we agreed that

sustained delivery of communitarian aid will begin this weekend. first to the areas where it is most urgently needed, then all those in need throughout the country, particularly in the besieged areas. the u.n. has said that the trucks are loaded and ready to go. we established a task force which has met already for the first time in a geneva, and will report regularly on the progress to guarantee the delivery of this aid. the issg also agreed to implement a nationwide cessation of hostilities to begin in one week's time. why a week? for the simple reason that the modalities have to be worked out. and people have to be communicated to in order to not have it start with failure. this will apply with any and all parties within syria, with the exception of terrorist organizations, daesh, an d al nusra. there is a lot of work to do before this effective cessation

can commence. end,end, -- to that we have established another task force, which the chair of russia and i will work on. we will work on the modalities of how we deal with this. the vast majority, in our opion russia's attacks have been against legitimate opposition groups. to adhere to the agreement that has been made, we think it's critical that russia's targeting change. the entire issg, including russia, has agreed to work to make that happen. be clear about this. says weign minister has need to work together as a group to determine who should be attacked, who is qualified as a terrorist and who. i will say bluntly that there is no way to properly put a

communitarian access -- a humanitarian access as ambitious as the one we put in place, and no adequate way to deal with cessation of hostilities unless we work together on every aspect of this from the political to the humanitarian to the military. we are doing that now. we are not approaching this with some sense of pie in the sky hope. we will work through where this targeting should take place, where it shouldn't, how we work together in order to be effective so we don't drive away from the table. obviously, if people that are ready to be part of the political process are being bombed, we are not going to have much of a conversation. that is what we are working on. the security council resolution has demanded that all parties immediately cease any attacks against civilian. that too has not happened to

date. the violence of the emerging -- violence of the regime went up. we know civilians are being killed. we hope this week can be a week of change. some have argued that the reason humanitarian access has denied is because assad and his allies might believe that by defying the will of the international community, they can win the war. that is a proposition being discussed. if that is what russia and assad think, then i believe they would be missing the lessons of the last five years. assad,ian, have rejected have endured 4 years of shelli ng, barrel bombs, gas, scud

missiles, chemical attacks, torture, and they may be pushed back here or there. but they are not going to surrender. i don't believe there is anybody that believes that they will. the countries that have and thed assad countries that have opposed him say they are committed to c ontinuing that. that is not a recipe for resolution. we have to take it vantage of -- taken's --f advantage of this moment. the more successful that people , then standing up to assad more successful they will be in attracting more jihadis to the fight. that is the perverse reality of what has happened there. whether one side or another has

an advantage today, this anflict still require political solution at some point in time in order to make these, no matter what happened. hinge point,. decisions made in the coming days and weeks could end the war in syria or it could define a very difficult set of choices for the future. everyone here knows what we have to do to get this right. putting an end to the violence and bloodshed is essential, but also providing syrians with the humanitarian aid they need is critical. at the end of this conflict, it will come when parties agree for a political transition accepted as the standard in 2012 in geneva.

at dinner last night, it was interesting. i was listening to the conversation of colleagues over the last few days. clear that the uncertainty, even the fear of what's happening to europe, of these refugees, of terrorism -- it is different. and everybody feels that. as a result, in some quarters, there is a pessimism in the air. i believe we have good reason to be optimistic about the future. the reason is the size, the durability, the capacity, the talent, the extraordinary resilience of this alliance. in one form or another that has

been expressed, not just in the formality of this alliance since it's came into being, but throughout the last century. yeah, there is violence in the world. you better believe it. but you know what, it's changed. by 20th century was defined state on state violence, millions upon millions of people die. -- people dying. there are actually fewer people dying in conflict today than ever before. despite the challenges we face between 1990 and 2015, remarkable things have happened. it changed life for millions of people. the range of -- the rate of child mortality fell by one half. life expectancy has increased dramatically around the world. particularly in developing countries. in 2001, there were less than

one million kids going to school in afghanistan, and all of them were boys. today, there are almost 8 million kids going to school. 40% of them are girls. more than 2.5 billion people have even access -- have access to clean water. the number of people living in extreme poverty has declined in more than one half. for the first time in history, it is below 10%. i could run a longer list of things that you know we're doing. productivity, the changes of technology. a century ago, the numbers of people brought into the near and middle-class in china and india and many other countries. a century ago this month, the battle of verdun was just beginning. the most excruciating chapter over hebrew -- of a horrific war that would cause 37 million casualties and kill one german and one frenchman out of every

five. -- 75 years ago, to be precise, millions of refugees were streaming not into europe, but out of europe. seeking refuge from a confrontation with fascism that would climax in unprecedented savagery and the holocaust. 50 years ago, half of europe hidden behind the iron curtain. a quarter of a century ago, europe was witness to a brutal campaign of ethnic cleansing that would rage for years. my friends, we cannot come to munich, to a security conference, and ignore the underlying message of this history. this moment is not as overwhelming as people think it is. we know what needs to be done. most importantly, we have the power to do it. the transatlantic community is not strong because we somehow have been exempt from tragedy or

strife. we are strong because we are resilient. because in a decade after decade, we have stood together to defend our security, prosperity, our values. because we have resisted attempts after attempt to divide and make us turn on one another, and above all, we are strong because of the core beliefs that holds together. -- hold us together. we need to heed the advice of president kennedy on his trip to berlin, the year of this munich conference beginning. "lift your eyes beyond the dangers of today," he said, "to the hopes of tomorrow." if we do that, if we remember the values at the heart of a partnership, if we take the lessons of history of what we've been able to accomplish in this incredible alliance, i have no doubt whatsoever we are going to get this right. we're going to get through this

moment, and we are going to build the prosperity and security and stability that every single one of us wants. we are going to do just fine. thank you. [applause] >> at the munich security conference on friday, iraq's prime minister discussed combating isis and the parliamentary efforts to bring economic and legal stability back to the country. is is about a half-hour. ladies and gentlemen, we are

having a huge challenge in iraq. we have succeeded in combating daesh on the ground. now we have almost all territories liberated from daes h, apart from a few exceptions. we intend this year to make it the final and last year for the existing of daesh in iraq. is task which is facing us civilization and reconstructing of the areas controlled by daesh. this is a huge task when oil income has dropped drastically. this is at a moment of what it was 2 years ago, which is a huge

drop in a country with the budget relies 90% on oil. the 2015,naged during where oil prices were also very 1/3rd of wropped to efore, but b we managed the war successfully. we liberated tikrit and ramadi as well. some people will say, okay ramadi was lost in 2015 and regained in 2015. we last a small area of ramadi, but regained a much larger area of it. it's not only restoring the city of ramadi, we have liberated a large chunk of a territory that was never under the control of iraq's security or says before. --iraq security forces before.

brief forces are fighting along outside our military and security or says -- forces. the population under the control of daesh moved to the areas controlled by the iraq security forces because they feel safer and feel better under control of the iraqi federal government. this is a huge torture from -- huge departure from 2 years afoo when they did not wantg, security forces to be there. this means daesh is losing ground. they are losing ground among the iraqi population. at the moment, a lot of people might look at daesh as an iraqi problem, but it isn't. we have many foreign fighters, many foreign terrorists. a lot from the gulf states who are well-off. they are not fighting because

they are poor. they are not fighting because they are displaced. they are not fighting because they did not get their rights. many of these terrorists fighting in iraq come from european countries who are well-off, better placed in society.but still they fight . the problem is a bad ideology. an ideology which calls for killing, which calls for eliminating others. i know there are a lot of people that are not accepting in the world. we have many politicians in the world that don't accept others. but going to the length of eliminating others, this is a new phenomenon that daesh has brought. they call this ideology islamic, but it isn't islamic. they are not islamic and they are not a state. a hat of terrorism and a hat of state. both are very challenging.

when we fight him as a mini-state, it is easier for us. when we fight them as a terrorist organization, it becomes much more difficult. this is not an iraqi organization. it is not a syrian organization. it is an international terrorist organization. the techniques i use are so advanced -- they use are so advanced in using social media in using modern technology to communicate and recruit terrorists from all over the world. it is so complicated i have discovered from documents from leaders among daesh which shed light on the network they are working on. unfortunately -- fortunately, not enough work has been done to combat the flow of terrorists from syria to iraq and smuggling of oil.

other valuables from our historic heritage. this is an ongoing business done by warlords in the region. we hope that countries can do enough to stop everything that is smuggled that will lead to the killing of more innocent people in iraq and syria. war, and ating a the same time we have to deliver at home. districts out of 18 with no water. people expect services, welfare. they expect shops. we have to deliver. ,ith this severe fiscal problem many have collapsed. and nobody understands why. there are many reasons, but i have to give a warning.

the collapse of oil prices may lead to other collapses. it is so hard on the oil-producing countries. it can affect others. it is like a domino effect. once you start, the resource of some of the -- the reserves of the gulf states are going to be pulled. that will have a multiplying effect on the stock market, on our economic activities in the world. we have to reform. started reform of our armed forces. when it came to office, the first thing i started was to restructure our armed forces. we did. a fewas been reflected in af months later in better performance on the ground. we caught on corruption.

the military became more efficient and more willing to fight for their own country. our military -- after ramadi, in the 2-3 weeks after we liberated it, daesh has used what amounts explosives, which some of them contain something kilograms of000 explosives. but they never won. led techniques would have to collapse of our oil program. that is what heaven in ramadi -- what happened in ramadi. daesh had used in a small space, in a short time, used such a technique of truck bombs that it

led to the collapse of our forces. not oanymore. the reforms are huge. corruption.ombat they go hand-in-hand. with that, fighting corruption, we cannot have it without economic reforms. we have started this path, and we are very much moving towards this. we have to be moving in one direction. what happened in the last 12 years in iraq. there was liberalization, there was the freeing of the economy. but every time the government takes a step forward, it takes another step awkward. -- step backward. we have to be steadfast in the right direction of reform, not going back. we cut the red tape that is that the mental to our economy.

-- that is detrimental to our economy. in the cities where we have liberated -- tikrit is an example. 90% of the population is back. those people have been living in camps. that we brought them back. can get back in their homes, even if their job is in conflict. forst reconstruction takes longer time. -- forced reconstruction takes longer time. , we have decided there are necessities that must be provided for citizens to go back. one, they must be free of explosive devices. then basic necessities like schools, water, energy, health

care must be necessary for the population to go back. it is not only tikrit. there are many cities where populations went back. with our limited resources, we are working to prepare what has been damaged by daesh for the population to go back by providing basic services. people are set to go back to their own homes. it is better for them to live in their own homes than in camps. this is something the international community, especially world, should work together on. -- especially europe, should work together on. there is a crisis about asylum-seekers. the number is huge. a lot of politicians in europe are worried about this. national lies a againsttional rise

refugees in europe. the last thing we want is this. this will play into the hands of daesh. daesh once this. --daesh wants this clash of civilization between europe and in the islamic world. so they recruitment of innocent people will increase. we should avoid that. we should address the problem at the source. we are doing this in iraq, but we have to accelerated. for refugees to go back to their homes so they don't have to seek shelter somewhere else. speaking with the chancellor in berlin, we talked about the criminal gangs trading in people. they are not being stopped collectively by countries, by europe and others. every country is working on its own without collaboration with others. i think we need a very clear standard.

these criminal gangs are misleading, are destroying families, are causing families to sell their valuables in order follow through on a promise of paradise. to progress oner this solution. addition to our military, we have the public mobilization force. these are volunteers, that when daesh entered into iraq, some elements of the armed forces collapsed. so we do not have enough combat troops to fight. volunteered to fight alongside our military. it was very good and useful. nationalists fighting

for their own country, for their own state, to defend their own families. but in the process, there are some who have sprung out of the outside of the control of state. we do not allow it. it andfighting against it should be eliminated. it is controlled by the prime minister just like any other facility in iraq. we have problems because we are at war. when we are at work, security becomes weaker. you need to use more of your security appointees for that war. there will be some crimes in the cities. we have seen that. we are addressing these crimes. things are asr,

peaceful as it could be since 2003. nightlife in baghdad is now thriving because for the first is safere 2003, it than before. we have removed many roadblocks and military checks to make it easier for the population to move. winning. the public is communicating with us, is helping us to find the terrorists. walls.t have fact that is a large place. -- baghdad is a large place. 25% of the population lives

there. daesh will try again to resort to terrorism and to bomb innocent people in the capital. media crazy. we have to protect the population of baghdad through our security tax and that security checks. car bombs come from outside baghdad. we do not want to subject people to a lengthy searches. we are trying to control the entry and exit to baghdad. they are equipped properly with modern equipment so we can stem the flow of terrorists and car bombs to the city. this is important for us. it should make it easier for the population to move in and out. that is our intention.

reconciliation is a fundamental pillar of my administration. we are working on it. in the past, people have talked about external reconciliation. we don't have an asus -- and opposition outside of the country. i would like to make the government more effective. our economic problem is a huge problem. we need a team that works together, not a team that works for their own parties. we need to have a coherent team that knows it is a problem and to communicate with the permit minister.

i cannot work on my own. i have to have that team. that team must come from the security council. harsh.sm is it is an international problem. we should come together to address it. it must be solved. year--, this mosul, the last city that daesh is controlling. but what happens next? where will daesh moved to? what will happen in syria? we have attended in agreement meeting yesterday between four ministers about -- between foreign ministers about the cease-fire in syria. it must be successful. the situation in syria cannot continue as is. everything in syria was destroyed.

this must be addressed, and we are hopeful that something will happen in syria to stop the flow of serious -- of terrorist to iraq. troops should be allowed in the country without the consent of the iraqi government. progress has forces to train iraqi security forces, to supply weapons. they are there to provide help for their own fighters to protect our soldiers. they go together. but we don't have armed combat on the ground. we don't have anybody other than iraqis. there aren't any iranians, jordanians, brits, americans.

some are there in the training camps to train our own forces. apart from turkey -- turkey since combat troops to iraq without consent of our government. we said this is not acceptable. come on, we are neighbors. if you want to help iraq, we decide how you help us. we should have a say in this. 100 kilometers deep into the where then a city turks claim it belongs to them. that is mosul. we think that is dangerous. we call on turkey and we hope that our friends will listen to this. we want friendship with turkey. that is important for us. they cannot move away from us. undisputed iraqi

territory. we do not need need them there. they can help us in other ways. we are glad for them to help us, but in a different light. we are very much standing of friendship to our friends and neighbors in the region. we think everybody who is to with us. it is very important to have regional support for us. we should work in the region to combat this terrorism. thank you very much. [applause] >> prime minister, you spoke about how the city population

stayed more comfortable under iraqi security forces, and the goal was to -- [indiscernible] -- was to extend the agreement of the forces. the city population has not been feeling at all comfortable under the militia, which is the much more dominant force in the iraqis to getting forces. what steps are you taking to assert a national force over the shia militia? pm. al-abadi: there should be no malicious according to our -- there should be no malicious. we have such things, i agree. they are outside the control of our government. we have our own problems with them. we are trying hard to eliminate them. we are bringing everybody under discipline. during the war, you may lose control over many elements. we have lost our -- to daesh.

we are fighting them around baghdad a year and a half ago. an identity crisis. what daesh has created something very dangerous. they use things against minorities. this has created a lot of hostilities. we have seen that in different locations. we have seen against christians and muslims. we have seen against shiites in certain areas. and again, sunnis in areas that are controlled by daesh. that vendetta we must stop this. , sometimes, our military cannot. when you liberate and area. it is there to liberate not fight against the people. sometimes, in tikrit, for example, for there were 48 hours problems. i issued a command for everybody to meet and handle the security.

it was successful since then. we intend to do the same. we don't have a problem now. in a different location, we have about 9000 bmf. we have a local police were now controlling these places. we do not intend to leave army inside of the cities. we are not going back to the previous era. it caused a lot of problems. we are letting every city that we liberate to be handed over to the locals. that is why we ask the coalition forces of the training of the local police, which is been very successful, be accelerated. yes, there are problems, there are criminal some of them we are guns some of them we are trying , very hard to combat. a lot of them you put in prison. a lot of them, we bring them in front of the judiciary. the reforms that we want is to

affect such problems. he asked that the judiciary be more effective in combating such crimes and we ask our security forces to be more effective in getting real information to combat this. sometimes, it is hard to get facts. providing reports is easy. it is easy to speak about events, but it is very hard to have proof in the course. that is a tough thing and we need the help of others so that our judiciary can work properly. >> one quick, last question from david. if i recognize him correctly. make it brief. we are running into overtime. >> mr. prime minister, you said that you believe that iraq's security forces can clear mosul

and other isis strongholds this year, but that leads to the question of how you be able to hold them and govern them. you answered the other man by talking about police forces and local security forces, but your parliament still have not passed the legislation that would allow the establishment of national guard of local sunni forces. i guess by double not allow that. how can you break through that problem. and allow the sunnis in mosul to govern themselves? pm. al-abadi: we submitted this law from the government to the parliament last year. we have waited two months for parliament to approve it, and they did not. there were some differences among political blocs. i cannot wait. i have started a new process of relying on local police. that is why we are training. that is what happened in ramadi.

local police units work together with our other units. to get into the city, and most of the units have withdrawn from inside of the locations and handed the areas back over to local police. we have managed to change the view of these police units. and they're capable of holding the city. i think this is a solution. the solution is local. locals along to the local police. this is an imperative which we had to find out because the law has stalled, and in actual fact, cannot have that bypass. that is there, and we are working very hard on it. thank you. >> thank you much, mr. prime minister. [applause] announcer: news reports say u.s. supreme court justice antonin scalia was found dead early

today and a west texas ranch. he was a guest at a resort in the big bend region. justice scalia arrived at the ranch on friday and attended a private party with 40 people. when he did not appear for breakfast the person associated with the ranch went to his room and found a body. the sheriff and fbi are involved in the investigation. a federal official told one newspaper there was no evidence of foul play, and it appeared that scalia died of natural causes. scalia is the longest-serving justice on the court and was nominated in 1986 by president reagan. justice antonin scalia was 79. ♪ c-span's washington journal live every day with news

that impacts you. join the conversation with politicians, callers, and other c-span viewers. justices from "politico" discuss their approach to covering washington. john harris will talk about the creation of "politico" and its influence. stories of 2016 and the events surrounding hillary clinton and bernie sanders. will answer questions about how gop candidates plan to win south carolina and nevada. watch "washington journal" live on tuesday morning. join the discussion. host: a discussion on the role of the democratic superdelegates in the selection of our presidential nominee. from today's "washington journal" this is 40 minutes. host: ben pershing's managing

editor at national journal and talks about the elegant process by which the democrats will select a candidate. one thing that has some supporters of bernie sanders concerned is that he beat hillary clinton by 20-points in new hampshire, but hillary clinton could lead new hampshire with the same number of delegates because of superdelegates. what is a superdelegate? caller: something in the democratic party. they have something similar in the republican party, but they don't work the same way. for democrats, they are members of the parties, the elites of the party, a little over 700 of them at a 4000 total delegates. the trick is they can support whomever they want. they're not bound by their states, the results of primaries or caucuses.

in new hampshire, bernie sanders can win new hampshire and still come out then pure delegates that hillary clinton because superdelegates go the other way. host: a delegate tracker is talking about the delegates in superdelegates. where the candidates stand. bernie sanders currently with 44 delegates bernie sanders with 44. hillary clinton with 394 a cousin of the superdelegates. when do they have to decide? they are not currently pledged to her camp, even though the ap is counting them as part of her supporters. in theory they can go all the way to the convention and decide. they are basing this on public endorsement. what hillary clinton has been able to do is rack up endorsements from members of

congress and party elites. news outlets are considering them pledged delegates. in theory, they could switch before the convention, that is what happened in 2008. host: how you get picked we a superdelegate? caller: if you are an elected can be a part of it. bill clinton, we know where he will go. it is a small number, and the hundreds out of the thousands and thousands around the country. bernie sanders' supporters are concerned. there is a petition on change.org with thousands of signatures. as of this morning, this one has 168,000 signatures on the move.org. bernie sanders is on a roll among actual voters with a tie in iowa and a win in new hampshire. race, superdelegates

can snatch that the victory. only by pushing back against this can we ensure the candidate we vote for becomes the nominee. are you hearing about the superdelegate system and the concern? has it cropped up since new hampshire, or was it a concern before? guest: 2008 opened many people's eyes. before that it is a foreshadowing of what is happening now. barack obama started doing surprisingly well early in the process. people noticed hillary clinton had more delegates than barack obama and the senate, how can this be true? there were complaints the system was rigged and enabling party over will the people. you're hearing him was the same arguments from bernie sanders' supporters. the 99% badly. what is going on with superdelegates fits his campaign narrative.

host: we are talking to ben pershing. .epublicans, (202) 748-8001 democrats, (202) 748-8000. ts, (202) 748-8002. schultz wasrman asked on cnn about the superdelegate system and the concern. here is her response. [video clip] : the unpledged delegates are a separate category. the only ones available on the primary and caucus are the pledged delegates. those that are tied to the candidate their pledged to support and they receive a proportional number of delegates going into our convention. unpledged delegates exist to make sure that party leaders and elected officials do not have to be in a position or they are running against grassroots

activists. as a democratic party we highlight and emphasize inclusiveness and diversity. we want to give every opportunity to grassroots activists and committed inocrats to participate the convention. unpledged democrats to make sure there are not competition between them. host: i'm not sure that would an anxious motor. you interpret a little of what the system, making sure party leaders and elected officials do not run against grassroots activists. guest: she is combining a couple of different possibilities. the delegates go where their state goes. superdelegates can go where they want. she is making the case superdelegates are not in elite insider wealthy group, but swath,nt a broad

including the most active democratic leaders. in her argument, where the people go matters. they represent the base of the party. if they choose to support hillary clinton or bernie sanders, the parties should support that. host: was this put in place to make candidates but -- candidates that shelters for the party? to have good relations with other democrats. was that the reasoning? guest: it was put into place in 1982. the fear was that a democrat could appoint an unelectable nominee. the democrats nominated george mcgovern in 1972. he lost 42 states. if the insiders had their say, the sentiment is they never would have elected george mcgovern. the sentiment is that the voters

don't pick someone who has no chance of winning. they put their thumb on the scales. host: the line for republicans. good morning. caller: good morning. how are you today? host: good. .aller: i am 81 years old i've been a democrat all my life . i was raised a democrat. i have voted for very few. my election here, if you are not a democrat you could not vote in of of the a load -- any the local elections. i switched back over to republicans, but that isn't the problem. it is politicians and americans. until we eliminate every career everician, then we cannot get america back to being a government for the people or by the people. host: what is your feeling on ?he political party

the folks like debbie wasserman schultz and rinse previous? -- rience pribus? host: i think she is a communist. i think we have a lot of those in our government. we have kanye west all it -- we have communists all in our government. if you research people, you would find over 90% of career politicians don't know what a regular person is. is a decision they make career orientation. helps their career. what can i do to get my career? they will even change parties if they can stay in washington and make a living, and suck us dry. host: can you talk about the republican system? do they have anything similar to the superdelegate process?

guest: yes, and no. they've elected officials and party officials to get a vote for the delegate of the republican party. and the republican system that are bound to go the way their states go. if you are from a state and your state votes for ted cruz or donald trump, you are not allowed to say i'm going in a different direction. republicans are making special light of that fact to make democrats look bad. host: florida, democrats. good morning. thank god for superdelegates. it is the only thing that is assuring me that the right candidate, hillary clinton, will be the nominee for the democratic party. these young people are turning to bernie sanders. i love bernie, he is one of my favorites. for him tosible achieve all of these paris colleges, free this, and free that.

come on now, that is not reality . hillary is the best candidate to put against the republicans to hold the democratic presidency. putting bernie sanders up there is a joke. way: would he feel the same about superdelegates if they were supporting a candidate you are not supporting? caller: to be honest, no. primarily, it is going for what they here. they don't think, they go for what they hear. host: can you jump in on what the bernie sanders campaign has said? are they trying to woo people away from hillary clinton? guest: they have been fairly quiet. it has been outside groups that have agitated. you haven't heard from the sanders camp because it is early in the process. continues to do well in

primaries and she continues to rack up superdelegates, you'll hear more complaints. host: superdelegates are just being polled on who they support . what happened in 2008 with barack obama and hillary clinton? what is their movement in the two camps between the superdelegates? early, hillary clinton had a huge lead with superdelegates. no one knew who barack obama was . over time, as he began to win states, primaries, and caucuses, some of the superdelegates went to obama. which really irritated the clinton cabinet. it was about electability. they realized barack obama could win and it made sense to support him. host: on twitter, what is the point of even voting anymore? talking about superdelegates. calls aboutg your the system and your questions

about campaign 2016. ben pershing is the manager editor of national journal and has covered campaign issues for how many years? guest: nearly 20. host: deviously at the washington post as well. illinois, line for republicans. good morning. caller: i have the comment about the superdelegates for the democratic party. to me, it is toxic waste. you have people working hard, knocking on doors, getting the vote out. here comes super delegates who say we don't care what you think . we are going to go in an opposite direction. we are going to vote for someone liar, a pathological someone who is viewed as dishonest. if you want to disenfranchise voters they should cling to the .uperdelegate-thing it takes away the average person

who gets a chance to vote. the 22 you read is right. why vote when a handful of goons will decide? you have millions of dollars spent, a lot invested in people's futures and dreams, they have the rug yanked out from under them. it is despicable. the democratic party isn't exactly known for doing things that people like. thank you. host: thoughts? guest: you need to keep the numbers in perspective. the idea that superdelegates can throw away with regular voters want isn't right. there are 4700 delegates. you need 2300 to win the nomination. if you do math, even if hillary clinton got every superdelegate she would have less than one third of the delegates she needed to be the nominee. host: how close does it need to be for the superdelegates to make a difference?

guest: i've read analysis that said if hillary clinton could get 42% of the national vote and every superdelegate, she could .in the nomination the point is she has to get a significant number of real votes. it is not as though people should stay home because superdelegates will decide. it is a fraction of the vote. indiana, line for democrats in cartersville, indiana. good morning. caller: good morning. want to say that there is a point devoting. that is giving -- point to voting. that is giving people the free will and choice. the main thing i want to put er in a name is gary zeav town located in the southeastern part of the state, 60 miles north of cincinnati. in our newspaper, they write

about us being the second poorest community in america. we are struggling community. i am a major supporter of bernie sanders. he is the answer man for all of this. this dilemma we all face. bernie sanders, i am supporting you. i would like for you to come to my town and give us a looking over. to see how dismal everything is. of whata major example is wrong with america. please come to our town. i want to meet you in person. i think martin o'malley should be bernie sanders' running mate. what bernie sanders may not know about foreign policy, o'malley has his finger on the pulse, i believe. host: bernie sanders and o'malley supporter.

on twitter, if a super delegates ways the nomination process, you can guarantee a republican victory. how do you think republicans would play this arcane process issue in a general election if it does become the difference-maker for hillary clinton? argue hillaryuld clinton isn't a representative of the people, she is a representative of the democratic party. they would argue it would suppress and whose he hasn't for her. enthusiasm for her. theypeople would fear would stay home and not talk on doors for hillary clinton. host: rob is an independent. go ahead. caller: thank you for c-span. i love what you do. i am an independent. .his is totally communism

the democratic party is a communist party. how can you take delegates away from the people who say they want, and say we are going to tell you who you want? hillary clinton is awful, a liar. she should be indicted. she should be indicted right now. thrown into prison. this is what i am saying, if the people who vote for bernie sanders -- if you allow this to happen to you guys, you should know you should never support any democratic candidates. bernie sanders for me, it is bernie sanders or donald trump. if bernie sanders does not win the democratic nomination after beating hillary, you can bet that not only me, but a lot of people i know will vote for donald trump or ted cruz, not hillary clinton. people do not like hillary clinton.

host: what is the recourse for bernie sanders's supporters? is there anything happening in the dnc that could change the process this cycle? guest: the dnc can't change the rules midstream. they can put public pressure on the superdelegates to waiver. it happened in 2008. sanders wins more primaries and caucuses there will be pressure on superdelegates to follow their states. you are on a loan island if your state goes one way and you go another. much, you willo see the pressure of superdelegates going to sanders. the lines for republicans, independents, democrats, you can call in now. a different topic, but i want to see if there is an analogy between the pledged and unpledged delegates. the big money and small donor battles between hillary clinton and bernie sanders. bernie sanders has more

individual donors. it is not as big of a check for bernie sanders. tuc and analogy? arguments are related. the party elites, the big people around the country are the donors themselves or they have relationships with the donors. sanders is getting less of their support then clinton. he is getting small donations and has been getting more votes on the ground. the arguments are related. for bernie sanders it fits his narrative. host: where are we on the money chase? the latest reports we have seen publicly? guest: sanders has done well because he is getting huge numbers of small donations. he is ahead of where barack obama was in 2008. he was seen as a fund-raising juggernaut. bernie sanders is outpacing where he was at the time.

host: west virginia, democrats, good morning. larry, are you with us? caller: i'm here. can you hear me? thanks for having me. are you there? host: yes, sir. go ahead with your question. caller: since delegates and superdelegates -- i don't think -- why does the big government always holler that everyone's votes count when we all vote, and then the delegates get to say where it goes? i mean, they say every people's votes count, that is a lie. that is like donald trump saying that the people who put the money in his who gets to pull the strings. i am a democrat, but me, my family, my trends are going independent for donald trump. we have to get this junk out of there that is running this

political stuff. it is ignorant. host: your concerns mirror those of kathy who says superdelegates are a way to take the power away round the people. back to the smoke-filled room days. i we going to see more criticism, or are we seeing that in light of the 20-point victory in new hampshire? guest: that is the second color to make the point there are strange agreements between trump and sanders supporters. on the surface you would say donald trump is a republican and bernie sanders is a socialist, but they are running against elites in their own party and of all kinds. are supportings them against all of leads. saying i will not take direction from you. to heart surprising trump supporters say that they think sanders is being treated badly. host: do you think trumbull weigh in on the superdelegate

issue? guest: if he is asked. i can see him using that against hillary clinton. host: republicans, go ahead. caller: i am really more of an independent. i lean more to the conservative side, but i believe i am independent. my real thought was that from the left, we hear so much about how republicans are about suppressing the vote. i believe that isn't true. that is my honest belief. i am sure there are pockets here and there, but i think that is a false claim. to me, this is an example of superdelegates, and what happened in new hampshire clearly is for practical purposes suppressing the vote. that is my comment. guest: you will hear that argument more from republicans. it has been a talking point for

democrats for years. they want everyone to vote. they want to make it easier to register, easier to cast your ballot. that it is republicans trying to keep the vote down. this is a good talking point for republicans to say you want everyone to vote, but then you make the decision. host: here is the front page of the courier out of charleston, south carolina. five things to watch for in saturday's gop debate. what are the key things to watch for? guest: there is still a battle at the top between trump and crews. their one and two in all of the polls. ted cruz has done a lot of work in south carolina with evangelical voters to drum up support. be a continues to fascinating grace for the establishment lane. jeb bush, marco rubio, and john

kasich battling for the next spot. this is the most acceptable candidate for the party establishment. it is a mess. the numbers haven't told us anything. all of them would like to break out in south carolina and put distance between himself and the other two. host: u.s. the most again and the most to lose? is to show heh can fight more. he has bigger get the most with donald trump, and donald trump has ignored him. they feel he has a little momentum and once to keep it going by showing he can be a fighter. one with a lot to gain or lose is marco rubio. in the last debate he was accused of being robotic. i think that is in his head. rubio has a challenge of going out and seeming relaxed to dispel the notion he is a programmed robot. that story line is continuing

since the last debate. rubio trying to recover his momentum is the story focusing on his campaign. michigan is up next on the line for independents. caller: thank you for giving me a voice. i am concerned about those citizenships. .- about dual citizenships it is impossible to find out what government official has it and with what country. look atthersome when i the candidates that we have, both republican and democrat. it is impossible to find out which one has a dual citizenship , or even if they had one and with what country. host: does your concerns stem from ted cruz's dual citizenship with canada? caller: no. it stands -- my call is mainly

about whether the delegates and superdelegates are aware of dual --izenships and two has them and who has them. if you could talk about that, i would appreciate it. guest: i'm not sure how many candidates might have dual citizenship. ted cruz has gotten attention because he was born in canada to an american mother. there is debate if he would qualified to be president as an "natural citizen." if use the nominee you will hear more discussion. i believe he renounced his canadian citizenship, but you will hear people saying they want to see evidence and if he is really not a canadian. on twitter, as if superdelegates where -- capes or just

masks, they're either hero saving us from ourselves or the you stealing our vote. caller: what hasn't been brought up fairly is that hillary clinton in 2008 one the popular vote over barack obama. .hen, he got the superdelegates rather than cost of obama the election, she capitulated, which i think was the right thing to do. for bernie sanders at this late date to try to change it is completely unfair to her. nobody is pointing that out. this superdelegate should have been changed before the election. does not getinton the nomination, i am a lifelong democrat, i will write her name in. i would hope she would run as a

third-party. take us back to 2008 and how this process played out in the end? right i don't think it is that superdelegates decided in the end. some states are proportional and give some of the delegates to the first-place finisher in the theary caucus and some to second-place finisher. some are just one or take all. what obama's campaign was good at was figuring out which states for which and where to play hardest. had relatively close modes, but obama took all the delegates. in many states, clinton did well, but obama figured out how to keep a couple of delegates. obama had a smarter campaign knowing where to focus resources. it isn't right to say super delegates decided at the end. delegates are awarded in different ways. host: how likely will either

party enter into a convention? guest: people use the term "brokered convention." it suggests guys with cigars in a back room making a decision. that won't happen. the question is if it will be an open or contested convention. if one goes into the convention, it would be a clinton nomination . it is more likely on the republican side because there are so many candidates and republicans who dislike donald trump. if he goes in with a lead it is possible he won't have enough at the start of the convention to get the nomination. they will have to sort it out in the convention floor. host: national journal.com is read can check it out. we have several great reporters come on. if you have questions about the superdelegate process, now is a good time to call.

atlanta, georgia. good morning. caller: what a privilege it is to be able to do this and comment. i think the dialogue and communications this morning is a great example of why we need voter reform. there are a lot of disenfranchised would-be voters that think "my vote doesn't count." i think we need to go back to a popular vote, as simplistic and elementary as that may sound, your vote should stand for something. in withtoo, this ties term limits. these career politicians that are there for 10-year's 20-years, or more. i get tired. i don't think this is how the founders of our country thought that 200 plus years down the road this is how it would be.

i think your vote should stand for some thing. superdelegates -- i don't think that policy or procedure city exist anymore. apathy that it lends to within the general population of voters. the cousins, when you do have superdelegates changing the whole structure of the vote process, people get fed up. i've heard that a lot this morning on the program. host: raw specs for voter reform -- prospects for the voter reform the caller was talking about? guest: you could have the nomination process where each candidate could vote to change the delegate process. he brought up something that applies to general elections. people have been complaining about the electoral college for decades. you can have a state where someone wins 51% to 49 percent,

and to the winner gets all of the electoral college delegates. al gore won the popular vote in 2000. and since then you've heard people complaining that this is not democracy. it is a hybrid democracy. a system that rewards the elite and there have been complaints for years. there is no move to get rid of the electoral college that is serious. host: joseph, go ahead. go ahead. caller: i've been listening to your program. each primary -- host: what is the question? the number about votes. they are states. person is allotted a

portion of the votes, and he gets determined at of all of the votes. host: can you run through the numbers again on the number of delegates needed to secure the nomination? guest: the total number of delegates for the democrats is over 4700, 47 hundred 62, they need 382 to get the nomination. are 712 super delegates. superdelegates are one out of every seven delegates. there are one out of every three or or you would need to win. well it is a significant number, it is not every number. the popular vote, the one in each state, primary and caucus, have more impact than superdelegates. host: more delegates will be allocated after south carolina primaries and the nevada caucuses. the south carolina democratic

primary february 27. the nevada democratic caucus is the 20th of february, the same day of the south carolina republican primary. sorry, the nevada republican caucus taking place on february 23. that was the front page of the state newspaper we were showing ahead ofhe headline is the south carolina republican debate. the state newspaper out of south carolina. michigan, line for republicans. caller: hi. i think that we need to look at that we usee way the superdelegates and the electoral college. that everyo think person's vote counts. that our system should reflect that, to be true. i think that -- i'm from michigan.

all of our superdelegates are pledged to hillary already. we are going to go ahead and write them letters to urge them to do the right thing. i am a registered republican voting for bernie. if hillary is the nominee because of the superdelegates, bernie's namerite in and i urge every other bernie supporter to do the same. a lot of people would rather vote for trump than hillary. i am just going to write bernie's name in rather than vote for trump. i think anybody on the republican side -- it is like a cartoon. it is pretty ridiculous, the the politics and in power act like the american people are stupid and they can make the best decisions. i don't think hillary clinton knows best.

things ourot of the country needs to be better will take drastic reform and change like bernie is talking about. i understand people are afraid of change. you get into a comfortable routine and you don't want that to change. the people at the bottom are more desperate and will do almost anything to make it. you should not have to live like that. host: ben pershing, do you want to pick up on anything from that call? guest: the super delegates from michigan have already pledged to hillary even though they haven't voted. you have hundreds of elected officials who have endorsed, well before their states have spoken. in the race, everyone saw hillary clinton as the clear favorite, so why not endorse? this is what gives rise to the democratic

party feeling disenfranchised. why should we vote if our elected officials are not listening to us? host: has there ever been an people's not let these votes be known until the convention to not influence the system? prefer that.ould and some want democrats to go the way of republicans, you have to go the way your state goes. host: have you heard anything from any superdelegates saying "i could switch if my state during its primary or caucus goes a certain way?" guest: not this cycle. it did come up in 2008. both sides use the same arguments against each other. barack obama said the system is unfair, how good hillary clinton have so many delegates, they should follow their state. hillary clinton said john barack obamased

even though massachusetts voted for clinton. she looked forward to having john kerry switch their votes to her. of course they didn't. but they had the same arguments against each other. host: go ahead. they echoed my feelings. speaking of the national journals page, facebook, i believe we the people need to stand up against this and joined republicans. i've heard republicans, independents, and democrats stayed the same thing. to theve it is insulting blood of veterans who shed their blood for our democracy. i believe it is almost treasonous to the values of democracy. the superdelegates and all of this other crop in the

primaries, it is no more than the electorate in the general. the democrats, there are certain ones that want to get rid of the elect moral system. -- the electoral system. the primary is no different. no different than a superdelegates. it is a rigged system they should get rid of. they know it is wrong, the people know it is wrong. it needs to change. we the people, we need a political revolution to get thei arses inut of their washington. abraham lincoln said we the people at the masters over the court and the legislators. not over the constitution, but over those that interpret the constitution.

perhaps these people need to lose their job and get kicked out of office -- perhaps jailed or fined, whatever it is. whatever could remedy the disenfranchisement of the public and popular vote of we the people. a point.t is a minute or two left. blue springs, missouri, democrats. caller: good morning, gentlemen. comment to make the statement,lly -- a about the delegates and superdelegates. we the people do have control over those delegates and superdelegates. we can vote them in or out, toch means we need focus on local and state elections. every four years, the national elections roll around and always talk about is who is running for president. if we focus more on who is

actually running in our local and state levels, we can control the superdelegates. host: ben pershing, i will give you the last minute on some of the solutions you heard from the last caller, and how you think the issue will continue to play out. guest: that last caller made an important point. super delegates will be on the ballots themselves. if you want to change how the process works, have the superdelegates get threatened. say if you do not support the state's pick, we will vote you out. then you might see a change in behavior. host: nationaljournal.com. come back and join us again. guest: thank you. announcer: u.s. supreme court wasice antonin scalia found dead in a west texas ranch. he was a guest at a resort in the big bend region.