to $15. according to the associated press, sanders is seeking more platform concessions at the meeting today. the roughly 16,000-word platform is a nonbinding document that a guidepost. after this nonbinding meeting, voted for. the draft under review already shows sanders' influence, urging an end to the death penalty. sanders has avoided endorsing clinton for weeks as he focused much of his energy on shaping his platform to mirror his liberal campaign, said he has millions of supporters as motivation to two democrats with knowledge will indicate he's offering his public endorsement of clinton.

>> please take your seats. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2016]] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. isit ncicap.org]

>> we need to come to order. please take your seat. >> all right. i need people to take their seats, please. let's be ready to reconvene. lease. you'll want to get home this

weekend. no one's used to our starting on time. no one's used to it. >> courtney. >> testing. amendment number 36 has been withdrawn. amendment number 58 sponsored by dennis on page 10 line 35. the proposed amendment is to add the following. many state democratic parties have voiced opposition to the t.p.p. and in this case, full and more complete discussion of the contents should be debated in public. the idea trust but verified. we do not support any senate

vote on the t.p.p. during their lame duck session this year. the agreement was not publicly discussed and debated on an issue by issue basis and we owe to it the next generation of americans to give more thoughtful consideration prior to entering into a well meaning but questionably agreement. there are too many questions to condone support of the t.p.p. >> the proponent of this amendment has one minute to explain it. >> i yield my time to tim hightower. >> is it on here? >> yes. you're only yielding one minute. >> yeah, i'm yielding my time to him. >> i got it. and we'll start the clock. >> i call up my second degree amendment to the abdusky amendment. >> that's not an order because we have not had anyone speak to

the original amendment. it hasn't been seconded yet sthofmente original amendment needs to be spoken to. you have one minute to do it. i will then see if there are 15 supporters which i assume there will be but we have to follow some decorum here. and i'm extending your one minute but it is on the issue of the original amendment. >> i'm in support of the original amendment and i would be substituting a -- to it. >> ok. you are in support of the original amendment. that's what you're in support of? you have spoken to in support of it. are there 15 individuals in support of it? there are 15 individuals in support of it. we will now go to a debate with respect to the original amendment.

>> we want to offer the second-degree amendment. >> listen, there is an amendment -- >> i've submitted. we have an amendment that has not been spoken to. >> it's been submitted. >> but with a one-minute explanation and then a motion. >> yeah. correct. >> ok. >> you need an explanation or a movement -- >> no, there's been a finding of -- ok. just give us one minute and we'll try to figure it out. i think some people are having a discussion. ok. just give me one minute.

>> if we can come back to order. progress has made. pursuant to agreement of the parties, we will hear the

hightower amendment. and once it is read by mr. hightower -- is that how we're going to do it? once it is read by mr. hightower, you then have one minute to describe it. once you've described it, i will ascertain whether there are 15 supporters. if there are 15 supporters, we will go immediately to a discussion. pursuant to that discussion, you will be granted -- i assume you're going to take five minutes to be followed by five minutes of discussion by an opponent. and then i'm going to call a vote. this is all pursuant toon agreement. we are going to do this as agreed. i now recognize mr. hightower for the purposes of making an amendment. one minute. >> thank you. it is the essence of this amendment that it is the policy of the democratic party that the trans-pacific partnership must not get a vote in this congress or in future sessions of congress. [applause]

>> this proposal is very important to grassroots americans and to the future success of our parties. that's because t.p.p. is not just another trade proposal. it's a little shop of corporate horrors that unleashes global wage busters, big perma, the world's banksters, and a hoard of other predators to rip us off and subvert our people's emocratic sovereignty. it's a fountain pen. so we're doing serious stealing in our society today. it's not enough to think that we can control this with soft words and regulation. rather, we must kill it before it kills our democracy. thank you. >> thank you. [applause] >> pursuant to agreement, i will now ask if there are 15 supporters. there are 15 supporters.

we will now have five minutes by the proponents of this amendment to speak to it followed by five minutes of the opponents of this amendment. please begin the five minutes. please begin the clock. >> i appreciate the unity that we're feeling here. this is going to carry us great distance into the next couple of months and i urge us, however, to join in the boldest, most absolute action that we can take against t.p.p., not just condemn it, but to act against it. there's an old cowboy saying out in west texas. speak the truth but ride a fast horse. ate it now stands, it is not soft, it's disastrously inadequate statement of our party's political real will. it's crucial that we fix this for two reasons. one, on principle. millions of our core voters are fire about the t.p.p. power

graph ascending that the leader of the people's party would be on fire about it. but using lame language tells them that we will not stand with them on this fight against the greed itself, against the people who wrote this thing, the corporate powers. and the second reason is politics. donny trump is telling working class americans all across this country that he will flat out kill t.p.p. no equivocation in it, particularly effective in the midwesterner swing states that we're counting on. and by the way, wee now learned the g.o.p. platform was specifically say no lame duck vote on t.p.p.. the republicans are going to be a flat out statement. he is going to hammer hillary mercilessly on the wimpy language and on her platform. is humiliating for --

[applause] so i offer this straight fathered amendment as a -- straightforward amendment as a political form of political viagra. to stiffen the spine of our parties so ordinary americans can know without doubt that we, democrats are on their side. lyndon johnson said you can't make chicken salad without chicken maneuver. he was more graphic but this t.p.p. document is 2,000 pages of pure unadulterated maneuver. -- maneuver. -- mafure. it has only six chapters deal with trade. the rest of this was thrown. as lilly tomlin says, it's

impossible to keep up if matter how cynical you get. >> two minutes. you got a lot of people behind you. >> chairman couplings said yesterday we should keep our eyes on our children in writing a platform. he's right about that. and on their children too and on their grandchildren and their grandchildren. the reason is t.p.p. is forever. most people don't know that. future presidents can't get out of it. future congress can't. the supreme court cannot. you can just put a photographer stamp on this thing if it is signed and the reason that it's a corporate wet dream is because the corporations wrote it. but we were not at the table. labor wasn't and environmentalists weren't and consumers weren't. you're not at the table, you're on the menu. absurd thatwhy it's our platform said that democrats

are 50/50 divided on t. that's not even close to true. 85% of the house democratic caucus is on record against the t.p.p. that's the majority of grassroots democrats are. nd if that's not enough -- [no audio] these are boxes take 10,000 to 15,000 petitions signed by the american people in the last week and a half. for this amendment. more than 700,000 of them have been signed. >> thank you very much. we could -- if we could clear the -- when you're done, please clear so we could have the opponents use their agreed to five minutes so that then we'll go to a vote. you're done. thank you very much. >> my pleasure. >> now the opponents of the hightower amendment, which actually does appear before you,

i believe, on the screen because it was -- mr. hightower's original amendment in essence, offered. people understand where we are? ok. five minutes in opposition beginning now. >> good morning, brothers and sisters. i am from the great state of new jersey. i rise. we just supported the texans amendment which protects -- saunders. sanders, it's very close. it lays out principles that will allow now, the trade deals including the t.p.p. along with -- long into the future. this is about principles, not process. i urge you not to support the hightower amendment. laborers come together and we spored our amendment and i believe this is the right thing for working families and working people of the united states.

thank you. >> next speaker. excuse me. excuse me. please, next speaker. >> gary blackburn from tennessee. you need to get closer to it. >> ok. >> i've never met a shy person from tennessee. you've got to get close. >> holler andrew jackson. >> there you go. go ahead. >> who was a free trade guy, by the way. mr. chairman, i think most of us in this room share the zeal that has been expressed here. sometimes, however, a zealous approach can make the -- can lead us to certain unintended consequences. this amendment states that there should never be any first future session of the congress on the vote on t.p.p. that is basically -- [applause] >> we elect our congressman in

tennessee and we expect them to stand up and represent us including issues such as this. this is the approach that the republicans are taking on gun control. f you want to -- to my friends in the peanut gallery, i want to remind you -- listen. >> let's have some decorum here. if you're going to do that, you are adding time. so complete your comments. you have three minutes left. >> i want to remind you of one thing. if the -- first of all, we have no authority whatsoever to tell the congress that they can't vote on legislation. that is undemocratic, absurd and unconstitutional. the second, if they can't debate the t.p.p., how can they make positive changes to it? thank you. >> all right. next speaker, thank you. next speaker. >> mr. chairman, fran turner, new york state.

i rise in opposition to this amendment and go back to the saunders amendment that we just supported that has the highest standards for workers, the highest standards to protect our environment that will apply not only now, but in the future to all trade agreements including t.p.p. thank you. >> additional speakers? any additional speakers? then we're going to go to -- pursuant to agreement. the debate was limited. we're going to go to a voment please put up the issue. >> is there still time? >> no. pursuant to an agreement. we're going to go to a vote. pursuant to an agreement. this is a yes vote would be in favor of the hightower amendment. a no vote would be against the hightower amendment.

>> the amendment failed. courtney, please read the next

amendment. >> thank you, mr. chair. amendment number 46 sponsored by -- >> excuse me. i apologize. that was my mistake. courtney, i apologize. that was an amendment to the amendment. we have the original amendment. which is number 58. so we have the original amendment. that was a substitute. is that a substitute? and it failed. ok. pursuant to agreement. courtney, read the next amendment. the amendment is deemed failed. >> thank you, mr. chair. amendment number 46, sponsored by domingo garcia on page 10 line number 36. the proposed amendment is to have this section read as follows. democrats will support laws and regulations that will prohibit any american company who leaves the country from doing business the united states.

>> one minute to speak to the issue. >> i am from dallas, texas. my brother is a dallas police officer. as you know the evens there have been pretty hard on a lot of people there. but some have been what's going on in wall street. and which we see over and over again my carrier in indiana leaving mexico and company after company leaving the united states and coming back and wanting us do business and buy their products. that's so wrong that i think democrats say if you want to do business in america, you need to stay in america. >> thank you. there are 15 seconders? one, two, three, four, five. -- there are 15. the proponents have five minutes. what's the time? five minutes. the proponents have five minutes

if they want to use it. if they don't want to use it, the proponents have five minutes. please put the 30-second clock up. please don't vote until i call for a vote. if you're in favor of the amendment, you vote yes. if you're against the amendment, you vote no. this is a 30-second clock. o please vote. 5 seconds. it failed.

we're going to do -- i'm going to ask for one more amendment -- two more amendments and then we're going to break for lunch, ok? and let's give me some guidance on how long lunch will be. but courtney, please read the next amendment. >> thank you, mr. chair. amendment number 143 has been withdrawn. amendment number 40 sponsored by domingo garcia on page 8, line 21. the proposed amendment is to have this section read as follows. democrats will support stronger criminal laws in civil penalties to be applied to wall street criminal who prey on the public trust. [applause] >> proponent. one minute. >> i don't know how many of y'all saw the maskaev "the big short." that's really what happened. nobody at goldman-sachs, nobody at any wall street went to jail while millions of americans lost

their homes when millions of americans went bankrupt. and nobody prosecuted them. a young man may go in and steal or rob a 7-eleven and take $20 and go to prison for life. but people who steal millions and billons of dollars never get held accountable. and i think the democratic party needs to stand with consumers and the working people of america and go after the wall street. not off the streets. thank you. >> do we have 15 seconds? ok. we have 15 seconds. do the proponents wish to use their five minutes? i don't see anyone. do the proponents 2013 use five minutes? i'm going to call the question. i think we can do this one on hand. all in favor, raise your white card. all oppose. it passes with at least three, four votes again.

passes with four votes again. now let me just -- because we made a lot of progress that may not seem like that, but we actually have. i want to thank everybody. we're going to take a one-hour, one-hour lunch. and we're going to hold people strictly to this, including myself which means i have to hold other people strictly to it. there are concessions immediately outside here. it is a cash sale. there are facilities in the hotel as well. or you can go anywhere and eat anything as long as you're back in your seat in one hour. we will reconvene in this ballroom in your spot. leave your clickers where they are, please. leave your clickers. we will reconvene in one hour. thank you.

>> during this break and the democratic platform committee meeting, we are going live to warsaw with president obama from the nato summit meetings. president obama:that includes protestors. it includes family members who policeave concerns about conduct. and they have said that this is unacceptable. there's no division there. and americans of all races and all backgrounds are also rightly saddened and angered about the deaths men and about the larger persistent problem of african-americans and latinos being treated differently in our criminal justice system.

so there is sorrow. there is anger. there is confusion about next steps. but there's unity in recognizing we want our not how communities to operate. president obama: so we cannot define actions of a few all of us. the demented individual who carried out those attacks in dallas, he's no more represented

of african-americans than the shooter in charleston was represented of white americans. or the shooter in orlando or san bernardino were representative of muslim americans. they don't speak for us. that's not who we are. and one of the things that gives me hope this week is actually seeing how the overwhelming majority of americans have reacted with empathy and understanding. we've seen police continue to reach out to communities that they've served out to communities and showing incredible profession as they're protecting protestors. we've seen activists and grassroots groups who have expressed concern about police shootings but are also adamant in their support of the dallas

police department. the police department is a great example of a department that has taken the issue of police shooting seriously and has engaged in an approach that has not only brought down their murder rates, but also drastically reduced complaints around police misconduct. that's the spirit that we all need to embrace. that's the spirit that i want to that's one of the reasons why next week using the task force that we have set up after ferguson, but also building on both police and

law enforcement and community activists and civil rights leaders bringing them together to the us who. -- white house. i want to start moving on constructive action that are going to make a difference because that is what all mericans want. so when we start suggesting that somehow there's this enormous polarization and we're back to the situation in the 1960's, hat's just not true. you're not seeing riots and you're not seeing police going after people or protesting peacefully. you've seen almost uniformly peaceful protests and you've seen uniformly police handling . ose protests

and as tough and as disheartening as the life was this week, we got a foundation to build on. we just have to have confidence that we can build on those better angels of our nature. and we have to make sure that all of us step back, do some reflection and make sure that the rhetoric that we engage in is constructive and not deconstructive. -- destruck tiff and we're not painting anybody with an overly broad brush. d we're not looking at the

worst people. now here in europe, this is a pivotal moment for our alliance in the nearly 70 years of nato, perhaps never have we faced such a range of challenge all at once, security, humanitarian, political. nato nations, the united states, canada, france, belgium and turkey have endured heinous terrorist attacks directed or nspired by isil. russia has violated the sovereignty and territorial integrity of an independent european nation, crain, and engaged in provocative nature towards allies. and a vote in the united kingdom to leave the e.u. has raised questions about the future of

european integration. in this challenging moment, i want to take this opportunity to state clearly what will never change. and that is the unwavering commitment of the united states to the security and defense of rope, to our transatlantic relationship, to our commitment to our common defense. and next year will mark the 100th anniversary of the european troops arriving in the first world war and ever since through two world wars, along cold war and the decades since, generations of americans have served here for our commorn security. in quiet cemeteries from france the netherlands to italy, americans still rest where they fell. even now more than 60,000 american military personnel

serve in dozens of european countries. and my point is this. in good times and in bad, europe united states, always. here in warsaw, we haven't reaffirmed our on bases to our security, we're moving forward with the most significant reinforcement of our collective defense. any time since the cold war. first, we're strengthening nato's defense in deterrence posture building in our european initiative which has already increased readiness from the ball. ics to the black sea -- batics and the black sea. the united states will deploy a battalion of american soldiers. the united kingdom will take the ead in estonia, canada and

latvia. this will mean some 4,000 additional nato troops in this region. moreover, the additional u.s. armored brigade will rotate through europe, including an additional 4,000 u.s. troops. meanwhile to the south, we agreed on new deterrence measures in romania and bulgaria. so nato is sending a clear message that we will defend every ally. we're also strengthening the readiness of our forces against a range of threats. so faith's joint task force is now operational and can deplay -- deploy anywhere in europe. recent progress in poland, roe maybe ya and spain, the ballistic missile defense is online and we're coming up with new efforts to better benjamin ginsburg new types of threats including cyber attacks.

nato is increasing our support to ukraine and our meeting at e commission, we agreed on a assistance package for ukrainian forces. the prime minister cameron, chancellor merkel, prime minister rensi and i met with the president and we reaffirm our support for territorial integrity as well as the need to continue economic reforms. thank you. i'm already getting applause. i'm not even finished yet. and even as the nato-russia council will meet next week, our 28 nations are united in our view that there can be no business as usual in russia until it fully implements its obligation. nato will do more also to fight against terrorist networks. every ally already contributed to the campaign against isil.

now the alliance will contribute aircraft to improve our recognizance against isil. nato training of iraqi security forces will move to iraq where they can be more effective. nations including the u.s. have committed more than 12,000 troops to nato's training mission. and in addition, some 30 nations have pledged up towards of $900 million to abstain afghan forces, which is a strong message to afghanistan. we're bolstering our efforts on nato's southern flank. the alliance will increase our support to e.u. -- to stop arms traffickers and go after criminals that are exploiting desperate migrants and we're going to do more to help partners from north africa to

the middle east to georgia strengthen their own defense capacity. and finally after many years, nato has stopped the collective decline in defense spending. over the past two years, most nato members have halted cuts and begun investing more in defense. and this means defense spending across the alliance is now scheduled to increase. especially i want to commend our friends in the u.k., poland, greece, estonia, all two along with the united states pay their full share of at least 2% g.d.p. for our collective defense. but for those of you doing the math, that means that the majority of allies are still not hitting that 2% mark, an obligation we agreed to in wales. we had a very candid conversation about this. there's a recognition of given the range of threat that we face

and the capability that we need, everybody's got to step up and everybody's got to do better. so in closing, i just note that this is my final nato summit. throughout my time in office, one of my top foreign policy priority has been to strengthen our alliances, especially with nato. and as i reflect on the past eight years both the progress and the challenges, i can say with confidence that we've delivered on that promise. the united states has increased our presence here in europe. nato is as strong as nimble and as ready as ever. and as we see it from the presence of montenegro at this summit, the door to nato membership remains open to nations that can meet our high standards. so nobody should ever doubt the resolve of this alliance to stay united and focused on the future. and just as our nations have stood together over the past hundred years, i know that we'll stay united and grow even

stronger for another hundred more. with that, let me take some questions. i'm going to start with kathleen hennessy of a.p. >> thanks, mr. president. i want to specifically ask about the dallas shooting and the attackers there -- attacker there now we know more about the man who did the crimes. i'm wondering if you could help us understand how you describe his motives. do you consider this an act of domestic terrorism? was this a hate crime? was this a mentally ill man with a gun? how should americans understand why that happened? and then also on the issue of political division and looking for solutions, there has been some critics that who noted that you immediately called about gun control. do you think that ensure that people treat their corners, let's say as they think about

his? palm: first of all trgs very hard to untangle the motives of his shooter. they are by decks, troubled, by definition, if you shoot people who pose as no threat to you, strangers, you have a troubled mind. what triggers that, what feeds leaveat sets it off, i'll that to psychologists and people who study these kinds of incidents. what i can say is although he may have used as an excuse his

in no way does that represent what the overwhelming majority of americans think. wantcans to a large degree to make sure that we have a police force that is supported because they know our police officers do a really tough dangerous job. and witness the profession of our dallas police officers as they were being shot at. the fact that they helped to

clear the area. they helped to get the fallen and the injured out of there. isolate the e to suspect. and you didn't have other casualties as a consequence of the police shooting back. that just gives you an indication of what a tough job they have and how well, they do it on a regular basis. so i think the danger as i said, s that we somehow suggest that the act of a troubled individual speaks to some larger political statement across the country. it doesn't. when some white kid walks into a church and shoots a bunch of worshippers who invites him to

worship with him, we don't assume somehow he's making a political statement that's relevant to the attitudes of the rest of america. and we shouldn't make those assumptions around a troubled uslim individual who is acting on their own in that same way. now with respect to the issue of , i am going to keep on talking about the fact that we cannot eliminate all racial tension in our country overnight . are not going to be able to offensive -- identify ahead of time and eliminate every madman

who mightd individual innocento harm against people. but we can make it harder for them to do so. and if you look at the pattern of death and violence and shootings that we've experienced over the course of the last year or the last five years or the last 10 years i've said this before. we are unique among advanced countries in the scale of violence that we experience and i'm not just talking about mass shootings. i'm talking about the hundreds of people who have already been

shot this year in my hometown of chicago. the ones that we just consider routine. now we may not see that issue as connected to what happened in dallas, but part of what's creating tensions between communities and the police is the fact that police have a really difficult time in communities where they know guns are everywhere. and as i said before, they have a right to come home and now they have very lomar gin of error in terms of making decisions. so if you care about the safety of our police officers, then you can't set aside the gun issue and pretend that that's rrelevant.

at the protest in dallas, one of the challenges for the dallas police department as they're being shot at is because this is an open carry state, there are a bunch of people participating in the protest who have weapons on hem. imagine if you're a police officer and you're trying to sort out who is shooting at you and there a bunch of people ho's not guns on them. in minneapolis, we don't know yet what happened but we do know hat there was a gun in the car . at apparently was licensed but it caused in some fashion

those tragic events. so, no, we can't just ignore that and pretend that that's somehow political or the president is pushing his policy agenda. .t is a contributing factor not the sole factor, but a contributing factor to the broader tensions that arise between police and the communities where they serve. and so we have to talk about that. and as i've said before, there is a way to talk about that that is consistent with our constitution and the second amendment. the problem is even mention of somehow evokes this kind of polarization. and you're right. when it comes to the issue of gun safety, there is olarization.

between a very intense minority and a majority of americans who think we can be doing better when it comes to gun safety but that express itself in stark terms when it comes to legislation and congress or in state legislatures. and that's too bad. we're going to have tackle that at some point and i'm not going to stop talking about it because if we don't talk about it, we're not going to solve these underlying problems. t's part of the problem. reporter: you mentioned san bernardino and orlando and americans have been warned that similar attacks could happen here in the -- over there in the united states and obviously what happened this week in minnesota and louisiana and dallas. these are not necessarily the same types of attacks and the

motivations may be different. but collectively, they're having a real impact on the american public and in that there's a real anxiety out there where people are genuinely afraid going about their daily lives doing routine things. president obama: right. reporter: so my questions are do you see any sort of common thread in these events? is there sort of just a new normal? is there anything that you can do about this? and what's your message to americans who are genuinely afraid because the anxiety just seems to be getting worse, not better and these attacks keep seeming to happen in much more regularity. it wasn't a part of their experience even say a year ago. president obama: i think we have to disentangle these issues. when it comes to terrorist attacks, people are understandably concerned not just because of what's happened in the united states but what

happened in brussels and what's happened in paris and what's is ned in turkey and what consistently happening in iraq and bangladesh and all around the world. and that's why the work that we've done with nato and our counterisil coalition and other artners is so vital. one of the things that's been mmented on is that as isil fraud erritory and the the kalaphat becomes more obvious, they're going to start resorting to more traditional terrorist tactics. they can't govern. they can't deliver anything

meaningful to the people whose territory they can control. the one thing they know how to do is kill. and so we're going to have deductible our -- redouble our efforts in terms of intelligence, coordination, our countermessaging on extreme -- extremism. working closely with muslim communities both overseas and in our own countries to make sure we are reducing the number of people who are inspired by their message or trying to attack us. and obviously, we have built up a huge infrastructure to try to do it. the more successful we are in iraq and syria and libya and other places where isil has gotten a stronghold, the weaker

they are, the less resources they have, the less effectively they can recruit. but when individuals are willing they have no conscience and compunction about killing innocent people, they are hard to detect and it means that we've got to continually up our game. having said that, i think it is important to note just the success that we've seen in the last several weeks when it comes to rolling back al qaeda. the liberation of fallujah got a little bit lost in the news. but that's a big town. and with our support, the counterisil coalition support, the iraqi government was able to move through there quickly. they're now positioning

themselves so that they can start going after mosul in syria. you're seeing progress along a pocket margin that has been used for foreign fighter flows. and so they're on their heels and we're going to stay on it. now when it comes to crime generally, i think it's just important to keep in mind that ur crime rate today is substantially lower than it was five years ago, 10 years ago, 20 years ago, 30 years ago. over the last four or five years during the course of my presidency, violent crime in the united states is the lowest it's een since probably the 1960's. maybe before the early 1960's. there's been an incredible drop

in violent crime. so that doesn't lessen, i think, people's understandable fears, if they see a video clip of somg killed. but it is important to keep in perspective that in places like new york or los angeles or dallas you have seen huge drops in the murder rates. testimony to smarter policing and a range of other factors that have intermediate to that -- contributed to that. not -- we should never be satisfied when any innocent person is being killed. but that should not be something that is driving our anxieties relative to where we have been in the past. to the issue of

police shootings. there is no doubt that the visual records that we are elevated people's consciousness about this. foras i've said before, latinosamericans, for in the pre-smartphone age, i were notnk that people that there isact evidence of racial bias in our criminal justice system. it is been well documented and it has been experienced. even before i got to the u.s.

senate, when i was in the state senate in illinois, i passed legislation to try to reduce the incidence of racial profiling by collecting data. that was prompted by evidence that was taking place in certain parts of the state. and the fact we are aware of it may increase anxiety right now, it hast and anger, but been said sunshine is the best disinfectant. by seeing it, by people feeling a sense of urgency, by the larger american community realizing that, gosh, maybe this is a problem and we have seen conservative commentators began to acknowledge this is something maybe we need to work on. that promises the possibility of actually getting it done.

it hurts. but if we don't diagnose this, we can't fix it. reporter: thank you, mr. president. as you come to the end of your term there was a lot of talk about your legacy. i know you may like to leave that to historians but when you look back on your presidency and consider race relations what you hope your legacy will be? how do you think the shootings in dallas and the high-profile shooting by police and other events will shape the way your presidency is remembered? president obama: i do want to leave legacy questions to the history books. what i can do, and maybe this is a fair response to your question, is to say how i have tried to lead the country on

this issue. more than anything what i hope my voice has tried to get all of us as americans to understand the difficult legacy of race. to encourage people to listen to each other. the legacy ofhat slavery and jim crow and discrimination did not suddenly vanish with the passage of the civil rights act or the voting rights act or the election of barack obama. better,ngs have gotten substantially better, but that we have still got a lot more work to do and as that was the

case with the police task force we set up that i try to encourage people to come up with practical, concrete solutions that can reduce, if not problems of racial bias. if my voice has been true and positive, then my hope would be that it may not fix everything right away but it services problems, it frames them, it allows us to wrestle with these issues and try to come up with practical solutions. lead to perspective may continued improvement so that not just malia and sasha can

experience the country that is more just and more united and more equal. and that is not going to happen right away. and that's ok. we plant seeds. may be sits under the shade of the tree that we planted. i would like to think that as trueas i could i have been in speaking about these issues. justin sing? reporter: thank you, mr. president. , you talk the summit about your confidence about brexit having. he stressed the year k will have access to an open market and must continue to respect the freedom of migration for workers.

someone who has repeatedly advocated for globalization and extolled diversity -- virtues of immigration, should not be in the negotiations? what specific assurances did you get in the summit from other confidence in the currency market is wrong and the subsequent effort to leave the eu will go smoothly? both human secretary kerry have used "if" to describe brexit. israel her away to put the toothpaste back into the tube on this issue? i think we have to assume that a referendum having been passed with a lot of attention, a linking campaign, -- link the campaign with relatively high participation rates will stick and that the incoming government, a conservative government is going 50.nvoke article

how that process unfolds, how the negotiation work will be up to the parties involved. the main message i've had here close friends, allies, commercial partners with the u.k. and with the eu. we will remain close friends, , continue toers have strong relationships on both sides of the channel. our primary interest is to make sure that the negotiations and this process are as orderly and as sensible as possible. recognizing that is in the interest of both sides to get it right. they are major trading partners. that is where goods get sent,

back and forth. important that neither side hardened positions in ways damage toately do their respective economies and ultimately to the world economy world economy our is still pretty wobbly in places. make a further point. i am not sure it is accurate to say that i am a huge booster of globalization. what is accurate to say is that i believe the process of globalization is here to stay. as a consequence of technology and the mobility of capital. ships andcontainer

global supply chains. and conceivably we could run ago the tape to 50 years and see whether we could rearrange some of that process, but it is happening. it is here. and we see it every day in our lives. everybody who has got a smart phone in a pocket is see you get -- seeing it. my argument has been that there are enormous benefits to be gained from that global integration. enormoushere are benefits from european integration, so long as we recognize that with that integration there is the danger of increased inequality, of workers having less leverage and capital having more leverage, that it threatens to leave

people behind and if we don't take steps to make sure everybody can participate in that global integration, making sure that wages are high enough, making sure that we rebuild the social compact so that tensions and health care -- pensions and health care are taking care of, making sure that communities are not completely abandoned when a factory leaves and there is an economic plan for transition. if we do not do that effectively, then it will be a backlash. with respect immigration, it is america's experience that immigration has been by far a net plus for our economic

growth, our culture, our way of life. in america that is by necessity because unless you are a native american everybody came from someplace else. europe may not have as many of those traditions, but keep in mind one of the huge macro economic advantages that america has is we're still a relatively young country. our birthrate is not dropping 'sf like europe's is or russia is or china's or japan's. that is a consequence of immigration. it is economics 101 that if you have a younger population, your growth rate will be higher. and immigrants are strivers and they work hard. they are looking to build a better life. otherwise they would not move from where they were.

that is in part of our tradition and our culture and our society. of this work we have seen in europe, that will always be a shock to the system. hi think it is appropriate for europe, even as generous as it has been. i think that chancellor merkel deserves a norma's and other leaders that are taken in -- enormous credit and other leaders that have taken and migrants deserve enormous credit. it's a strain on budget, politics, culture. it is legitimate for them to say we have to slow this thing down. we have to manage it properly. that is why we are setting up a u.n. conference on refugees on the margins of the united nations general assembly because a few countries should not be shouldering the burden for 60 million refugees. and we have got to come up with strategies to allow people in

poor ors that are very are in the middle of a war zone enjoys in peace and prosperity. other words that otherwise the world shrinks and they want to move. givenone more reason why the fact of global integration we have to think globally, more broadly. because our security interests, our economies are all going to depend on the institutional arrangements that we have across boundaries. example of an really enduring multilateral institution that helped us get through some very difficult times. but even the best of institutions have to be adopted

-- adapted to new circumstances. that is true for organizations like nato. organizations like the u.n. it is your for organizations like the eu. thes true for all architecture that has helped the world and our countries improve their standard of living and reduce overall violence between states substantially over the last several decades. mark lander? thank you very much, mr. president. you have been scrupulous about saying he would not comment on the justice department investigation of hillary clinton's e-mail. that investigation is now closed and i hope i could ask you about some of the comments that fbi

director, he made a few days ago. but ient obama: you may, want to make sure you not wasting your question. i will continue to be scrupulous about not commenting because i think director call me could not have been -- comey could not have been more exhaustive. while we were over here or flying he was presenting to congress for hours on end. chanceant to give you a just in case you didn't want to burn your question. reporter: i have a backup. [laughter] maybe i could cut to the chase and ask you about a broader question. he did talk at the end of his presentation about how he feared there was a broader cultural issue in the state department towards the handling of classified information that troubled him. i wondered if you, since you rely on the state department to conduct foreign policy, whether that concerns you as well?

and could i ask the other question because i think it might get an interesting response? you last may past a milestone in that you were president longer when the country was at war in your predecessor, george w. bush. any he complete your presidency as you will with troops in afghanistan, syria and iraq, he will be the only two-term president in american history to have served with a country at war. given the way you ran for office and the aspiration to broaden the office how you feel about that reality. and a second follow-up. should the american people simply resign themselves to living in a state of perpetual the even if that war is not all-out war we think of in the 20th century? president obama: that was an interesting question. first of all, with respect to the state department i am concerned.

got is challenge we have primarily driven by the changing nature of how information lows. -- flows. the advent of e-mail and texts is justtphones generating enormous amounts of data. hugelysually -- convenient. in real-time i'm getting information that some of my predecessors why not a gotten for weeks. but what it also is doing is creating this massive influx of information on a daily basis. putting a norma's pressure --

enormous pressure on the department to sort through it, outsified properly, figure what are the various points of entry because of the cyber attack risks that these systems have. knowing our adversaries are possibly trying to hack into these various systems. all thever classified, advantages of this new information suddenly go away because it is taking too long to process. to thinkeen trying about this in a smart way. k has a rangeary of initiativeserry to get our arms around this -- secretary kerry has a range of initiatives to get our arms around this. we recently -- i just recently signed a bill about freedom of information and requests built on a number of reforms we put in

place. we are processing more freedom andnformation act requests doing so faster than ever before. the problem is the volume of requests has skyrocketed. the amount of information that answers the requests has multiplied exponentially. seeinggovernment you are this problem. and it is a problem in terms of domestic affairs. it becomes even bigger problem when you're talking about national security issues. it is something we will have to take care of. with respect to reflections on when i came in the office we had 180,000 troops in iraq and afghanistan. today we have a fraction of that. they are not involved in active

combat situations, but are involved in training, advise and assist situations. direct attacks we lost against isil with conjunction with the iraqi government and the syrian government. in some ways i think you would our militaryt operations today in iraq and afghanistan are fundamentally different than the wars we were engaged in when he came into office. -- when i came at office. but i think you are making an important point which is when we are dealing with nonstate actors and those nonstate actors are located in countries with our ultimateity

goal is to partner with those countries so they can secure themselvesrs and eliminate these terrorist threats. but as we have seen and afghanistan, that takes time. the afghans are fighting. they are much more capable now than they were when i came in the office. but they still need support. it is really tough territory and it's a really poor country. rateseally low literacy and not much experience in things that we take for granted like the just ask. -- logistics. in,ave an option of going taking out al qaeda, pulling out

, potentially than saying -- seeing a country crumble under strange of continued terrorist activity or insurgency and then going back in. or we can try to maintain a limited partnership that allows them to continue to build their capacity over time. take our ownly actions against those organizations that we know are trying to attack us or our allies. because they are nonstate actors is very hard for us ever to get the satisfaction of macarthur and ae emperor meeting war officially being over.

was defeated in the sense we were able to execute a transition to a democratically elected iraqi government. for all of our efforts and incredible courage and bravery and sacrifice of our troops, the political structure there was still uneven. continued sunni resentments, continued debath ification. and as a consequence those vestiges of aqi were able to reconstitute themselves, move into syria has syria began to engage in civil war, rebuilding come back in. some have argued that this is the reason why we should have

never pulled out of iraq, or we should have left some larger presence. we did not was that have an iraqi government that one of them, unlike afghanistan for we have been invited. us --very difficult for for me to put our troops in a precarious situation where they are not protected. think what we've been trying to do, what i have been trying to do is to create an architecture, a structure. it is not there yet, that emphasizes partnership of countries. emphasizes building up fragile states, resolving internal conflicts wherever we can, trying to do as much as we can

,hrough our local partners preserving the possibility, the necessity, to take strikes ourselves against organizations or individuals we know are trying to kill americans or belgians or french or german's. combine that with much more effective intelligence gathering. but it becomes more of a hybrid approach to national security. and that i do think is probably going to be something we have to continue to grapple with for years to come. the good news is that there are fewer wars between states than ever before. and almost no wars between great powers. that is a great legacy of

leaders in the united states and asia after the cold war, or after the end of world war ii that built this international architecture that has worked. we should be proud of that and preserve it. this different kind of low great threat, one that is not an existential threat but can do real damage and real harm to our societies, and creates the kind of fear that can cause division and political reactions. we have to do that better. we have to continually refine it. out ouron that i put announcement about the civilian

casualties resulting from drone attacks. understanding that there are those that dispute the numbers. what i'm trying to do is institutionalized a system where we begin to hold ourselves accountable for this different kind of national security threat. and the different kinds of operations. and it is imperfect still. andi think we can get there what i can say honestly is whether we are talking about how the nsa operates or how drone strikes operate or how we are partnering with other countries or my efforts to close guantanamo. presidency,f my banning torture -- by the end of my presidency i feel confident

be on ase efforts will firmer legal footing, more consistent with international law and norms, more reflective of our values and our ethics. but we will have more work to do. it is not perfect. we have to wrestle with these issues all the time. of theander in chief most powerful military in the know, i spent a lot of time brooding over these issues. i am not satisfied you got it perfect yet. betteray honestly it is than it was when i came in office. that you very much. [applause]

[no audio] >> this is a live picture of the orlando hotel ballroom for the democratic party platform committee is meeting for the second day. they are expected to return from a short lunch break. they may be a little delayed. there are 187 members of the committee hashing out this roughly 15,000 word platform, a nonbinding agreement that will serve as a guidepost for the party. the document will be voted on at the convention in philadelphia later this month. our coverage will continue throughout today's session and we expect them to resume shortly. [indistinct chatter]

>> while we are waiting to the democratic party platform committee to resume their meeting after the lunch break we will show you some of this morning's session beginning with dnc chair and florida congressman debbie wasserman schultz's opening remarks. [applause] debbie wasserman schultz: thank you so. thank you very much. thank you. thank you very much.

thank you, governor. thank you mayor franklin and thanks to the leadership of our platform committee and to all of you. welcome to my home state of florida. to hostll very excited the platform committee and make sure we focus on the contrast between the direction our party wants to take this country and continue to move us, and the dramatically backward direction the republicans have proposed. i want to thank people who have also extremely busy schedules and uptake in extra time out of your schedule to help make a difference in this party. that is my congressional colleagues who are either members of the platform committee or the drafting committee. maxine waters a california, barbara lee of california, danny thompson in mississippi, and eleanor holmes norton of washington, d.c. chair,to thank our vice

secretary of state rhode island l.a. chordata -- ne -- and greg rosenbaum. thank you all very much. thank you to all of you, the members of the full platform committee sure here this weekend. as we saw last night, your perspectives are critical for finalizing this statement of our values and affirmation of our rarities of the party. members ofo all the the drafting subcommittee for the hours upon hours of work you put into this process. butow some of them are here they were all amazing from washington to phoenix to st. louis. they brought the broad spectrum of our parties and the best ideas the campaign to the process with a giddy, patients, intelligence and understanding. a special thank you to my colleague and friend congress and elijah cummings -- congressman elijah cummings. thank you for your dedication and your service. thank you so much. [applause]

my friends, we are two weeks away from our convention and just performance away from electing a democrat has the next president of the united states. [cheers] [applause] it feels so good to say that. thanks to your work the state of our party heading to the convention and the general election will be strong. i know the effort you have all made not only did he hear but to contribute your ideas and your passions in the run-up to today's meeting. i thank you for your commitment to our party in the process. looking around this room i have no doubt the hopes, dreams and aspirations of the american people are well represented here in orlando this weekend. when you finish your work today, or tonight, the american people will have a clear choice. a party with a nominee committed to moving america forward versus a candidate committee to hitting people against one another in a timely our leaders to help bring us all together. these are tumultuous times.

despite the real progress over the last seven and a half years with democratic leadership in the white house many americans are still struggling. they are sick of the partisan gridlock plaguing washington. and republicans think need to go back to their version of the good old days when we took care of the wealthiest and everyone else was on their own. and they are all too happy to keep hitting americans against one another. but every day it seems we are reminded that we are stronger together. just this week a series of deadly shootings -- has left us reeling. last night i joined many of you at a vigil to recover those victims. here in each of their names was as deeply personal and somber reminder that we must never forget them and those they left behind, but also a testament to the spirit of our first responders. those who help the wounded and wrist or online -- risked their own lives. the visual was a

reminder of our shared humanity, that we are much more alike and we are different. these are indeed trying times. my spirits have been lifted for the simple reason i am proud of what our party and our country stand for in times about the darkest tragedies and greatest triumphs. when times are tough and beyond our understanding we lean on one another. we come together. a few weeks ago when congressman john lewis led a sit-it on the floor to demand a vote for commonsense gun safety laws i was proud to join my democratic colleagues literally spending the entire night of the florida house of representatives to call attention to the -- on the floor of the house of representatives. i read a letter a lab was written to us by my dear friend and former colleague gabby giffords. "gun violence affects all of us, the solution is not up to some of us. we are all responsible for our safety today and the country we pass on to our children

tomorrow." what she wrote applies not just a gun violence but to every issue in which we are engaged in his democrats and human beings hoping for a brighter tomorrow. we are responsible for the country pass into our children. the peace and security of their neighborhood and their nation. the fairness of the justice system. the opportunity they have to succeed in the world economy. their access to health care. even the sustainability of the global ecosystem. we are responsible for reforming our broken immigration system, protecting women's health and reversing climate change before it's too late. we are responsible for ending mass incarceration. responsible for bringing our communities together again. black, white, brown and blue. and we are responsible for investing in infrastructure and making sure a hard days work is rewarded with a fair wage and the dignity of a secure retirement. and that means building an

economy that works for everyone, not just those at the top. after five and a half -- feel free to applaud that. [applause] years ase and a half chair of the dnc i cannot be more proud of the fact that this platform is poised to be the most progressive, inclusive and ambitious platform and the democratic party's history. [applause] that is a phenomenal a college meant that we are achieving together. i cannot be more proud of how starkly contrast is with the republican alternative. four years republicans of elevated the most extreme voices in our country, and the result is a republican party stuck in the past and every nominee that is the most divisive, reckless and most dangerous president of candidate in modern history. [applause] thank you. trump is a man who is demonstrated time and time again that think he values the most is his own net worth. a man who rooted for the housing

traffic -- crisis in 2008, said wages are too high, women should be punished for seeking an abortion, to blames immigrants and religious groups for our problems instead of seeking solutions. and it was neither the temperament nor the judgment to serve as president of the united states of america. [applause] we will make sure he gets nowhere near the white house. america is better than that. we deserve better than that. my fellow democrats, we have an election coming up. i believe the only thing that can keep us from winning is if we lose sight of the fact there are more that unites us than divides us. as we begin the final steps of the process my only request is that we stand strong together and offer the american people -- thank you. that is so important. [applause] that is so important because we need to make sure our platform

reflects the hopes, dreams and aspirations of those same people. a platform that attracts an electorate as a person optimistic as our country itself. a platform that prizes action over obstruction and inaction. it places people over profits and unity over division. this is a complex task with no perfect answer. as we saw last night, we can disagree without being disagreeable. i know you are a passionate group. you would not be here and our not the case. -- if that were not the case. i know you not only find common ground but higher ground. i know that thanks to the leadership of the democratic national committee and all of our members and our party members across this country, particularly the incredible vice-chairman of letter expansion donna brazil and the president of the association of state house democratic chairs rate buckley, both of who are with us this morning, i know the documents you deliver to our

convention in philadelphia will set the stage for the historic democratic victories that we will help spur in november. we are stronger together and on to victory for democrats in november. thank you so much. thank you. [applause] >> thank you. thank you for your leadership and thank you for your remarks and encouragement today. i believe we can be proud of the work we as democrats have done over the past month and during our meeting yesterday. to demonstrate our commitment to keeping this party and our nation moving forward. i thank each and every one of you for everything you are doing and everything you will continue to do on behalf of the party and our candidates between now and november. as we continue focusing on the platform draft today our recommendation that includes the

storage investments in infrastructure, working people should earn at least $15 per hour, ending mass incarceration, and the school to prison pipeline, protecting women's health and repealing the high -- heideman at -- hyde amendment, forward thinking proposals bella mcgivern -- that will make a positive difference in the lives and well-being of our families and communities. let me remind you before we go forward of the rules of procedure in the beating protocol that -- and the meeting protocol we discussed yesterday. we will consider the amendments in this section order laid out in the platform, picking up where he left off yesterday with the section titled "fight for economic fairness and against any quality." -- any quality."

-- any quality. those who are proposing amendment will have one minute the state and explain the proposed amendments. after a brief explanation the chair will call for seconds. to be considered a proposal, the amendment must have the support of at least 15 committee members who were present at the time. if the amendment is properly seconded, they will have time to speak in favor. once that time is exhausted or yielded back to the chair, and those who would like to speak in opposition will be recognized. that is a change. as a reminder, members cannot use time after it has been yielded back to the chair. -- and last but not

least, let's be respectful of each other today. our goal of creating a platform that our party's nominee and we can run on and not away from is the one that is shared by all of this. as a reminder, the amendments will be fight for economic fairness were included for the packet distributed to members last night. let's begin. governor malloy? [applause] governor malloy: i would like to ask secretary of state of rhode island to which it is the next segment. >> there we go. good morning. thank you, mr. chairman.

because i'mrat committed to addressing the concerns at the heart of people's lives. their children, their children's education well-being, their health and safety of seniors and the opportunities available in our community. the democratic party is committed to the economic fairness. in 2016, we aim to tackle the structures and practices that stand in the way of a striving middle-class. we must remove disability barriers for full participation i all. by fixing the financial system, making sure corporations pay their fair share of taxes, and supporting trade deals that are properly enforced. we will ensure that working families, seniors, and our economy as a whole succeed. i pass it back to the

chair. >> pursuant to discussions had sides of the -- we willm going to make some slight adjustments with respect to time that is the negotiated between the parties. bear with us as we go through this process. i believe we have an amendment being offered. are you ready? please. >> amendment number 93. the final version that was situated to you do this morning -- distributed to you this morning and it combines the minutes to 34 and 235. this is sponsored by the sanders. page 10, line 8, the proposed amendment is long. acknowledge that for millions of americans global trade has failed to live up to its promise. with too many countries breaking the rules activity corporations

outsourcing jobs at the expense of american workers and communities. over the past three decades america has signed on to too many trade deals that have not lived up to the hype. trade deals often boosted the profits of large corporations while at the same time failing to protect worker rights, labor standards, the environment and public health. we need to end the race to the bottom and develop policies that support jobs here in america. that is like democrats believe we should review agreements negotiated years ago to update them to reflect these principles. any further trade agreements must make sure our trading partners can't undercut american workers by taking shortcuts on labor policy or the environment. they must not undermine democratic decision-making through special privileges and private courts for corporations and trade negotiation must be

transparent and inclusive. democrats' priorities is to significant a strengthen enforcement of existing trade rules and strengthen the tools we have, including by holding countries accountable on carrots even inflation, in significantly -- and significantly expanding resources. china had other countries are using unfair trade practices to tilt the playing field against american workers and businesses. when they don't cheat roddick's on our market subsidized state on enterprises, the value currencies and discriminate against american companies, our middle-class pays the price. that has to stop. democrats will fight to use all of our trade enforcement tools to hold china and other trading partners accountable. and all countries must be held accountable when they manipulate the currencies to gain a competitive advantage. well we believe that openness to the world economy is an

important source of american leadership and dynamism, we will oppose trade agreements that do not support good american jobs, raise wages, and improve our national security. we believe any new trade agreement must include strong and enforceable labor and environmental standards in their core text with streamlined ineffective enforcement mechanisms. they should crack down on the unfair and illegal subsidies other countries granted businesses at the expense of hours. they should promote innovation and access to lightning -- lifesaving medicine. we should never enter into a trade agreement that prevents our government or other governments from putting in place rules that protect the environment, food safety, or the health of u.s. citizens or others around the world. any traded your event must protect -- agreement must protect workers and not undermine the critically needed prescription drugs.

these are the standards all democrats believe should be applied to all trade agreements, including the transpacific partnership. proponent has one minute explanation period. >> good morning, everybody. my name is lee saunders. i am the president of the 1.6 million members. everyday heroes who never quit providing public services to our community across the country. [cheers] lied.. -- i bring a section on behalf of organized labor in the full support of hillary rodham clinton. the vitally important issues we are grappling with here this weekend, this may be the subject to which ordinary americans are paying the closest attention.

i know we all share in her frustration with the trade deals that effort our community. those trade deals effort our community for decades. my minute at necessary labor to the draft. it has new relation that affect working families and the private and secretive courts and privileged international corporate interest over the common good and undermines our very democracy. [applause] deserve a level playing field. this amendment requires that the set the bar higher for american families and ourselves. iflee, i have to find out there are 15 people endorsing this. and there are. [cheers] let me explain now. human over the one minute so i don't get myself in trouble. pursuant to agreement, the

proponents of this amendment are now given eight minutes to speak to it. your eight minutes will begin now. this is pursuant to agreement. >> i want to start from the beginning. [laughter] >> american workers deserve a level playing field. this amendment requires we set the bar higher for american families and arm ourselves with stronger tools to hold our trading partners accountable. thecrucially, we state that standards we set today don't just apply to the old trees -- treaties. and not just the future negotiations, but to the current treaty, the tpp. the powerful corporate special interests we are up against in this fight can only be overcome if we forge unprecedented unity. i believe this can be done starting with all of us here,

today, in this room. we have wide public support behind us. wider than ever. we have the open opposition to tpp from both of our candidates running for president of the united states. [applause] all democratic candidates and labor are of one view. no on tpp. [cheers] no more. no more. trade deals a give americans and working families across the country the shaft. we are united on this issue. i.s. ask for your united support for this amendment. -- and i ask you for your united support on this amendment. thank you. [applause] >> mr. chairman, fellow democrats, my name is bob martinez.

i am the international president of the international association of machinists and aerospace workers. we represent proudly 630,000 fighting machinists across this country. [applause] our union is an industrial union. our union makes things. trade agreements like tpp will cost our nation hundreds of thousands of jobs, if not millions of jobs. jobs, american jobs. all workers and communities will thisas a direct result of transpacific partnership agreement. let's be clear. we are not opposed to trade. trade, --t they are but we want fair trade.

what is being proposed in this flawed trade agreement called tpp -- tpp must be transparent. it must be inclusive. believe with all the respect that this amendment offered by brothery sanders is -- lee saunders is a huge improvement to the existing lanes before you. it clearly says guidelines for trade agreements to meet in order to gain passage in congress. doesseriously flawed tpp not and cannot meet the standards set forth in this amendment. as a direct result i strongly democrats,y fellow to vote yes to this amendment, this pro-worker amendment for

all american workers. [applause] >> my name is randy weingarten. i'm the president of the 1.6 million member american federation of teachers. [cheers] have been against tpp, in these two or three years we have watched communities all across the country, communities where our members are nurses, teachers , communities have been unraveled because of what happened to our manufacturing base. and we are glad of the robust debate in the country this year on trade. and we are glad that both of our candidates are against tpp.

but what this amendment does, but the saunders amendment does in addition -- sorry about yelling. [laughter] in addition -- girls shouldn't yell. in addition to what was already in the platform is we take what trump has now used as a sound great -- soundbite and we turned it into a standard. and that is what this does. democrat to have a standard on trade. note about what we are for, just what we are against. and what we are for, not just in the pacific but in other areas of the world. i want to make one more point. in this amendment the point

about no more private courts. this is not a hypothetical. cases are coming up in other countries that seem crazy. a company sued poland for billions of dollars because poland decided not to privatize a government function. what this amendment does is say these are the standards we are for and we will hold everyone accountable for these standards of fair trade, not free trade. i ask for unanimous support of the saunders amendment. >> one minute. [cheers] [applause] name is bennie thompson. i'm a member of the united states house of representatives, and i'm one of those folks who has to decide on this issue. i support the saunders

amendment. i have never voted for any trade agreement since i have been and united states house of representatives. i will not. nafta seen the impact of and a lot of other trade agreements that have been to the detriment of working men and women in this country. i will not support any agreement that denigrates workingmen and women in this country. let me be very clear. democrats cannot support anything less than fair trade. it is an abomination for us to even consider any trade supportt that does not working men and women. support the saunders agreement. >> pursuant to our agreement of the parties, i am now calling on

ben jelous for making an amendment to the amendment. [applause] [cheers] do you have that? you will do it from there. >> mine is really simple. "just want to add the words that's why we oppose the tpp." [applause] >> pursuant to agreement, we have 15 seconds. pursuant to agreement, you have five minutes to speak to the issue. >>