>> good afternoon and welcome to the hudson institute. we are a policy organization dedicated to the global engagement for a secure, free and prosperous future. i would like to welcome our audience present, as well as the c-span during audience. i am truly honored to welcome a remarkable public servant and a good friend of the hudson institute, to be with us this afternoon, director of national intelligence, dan coats. dan coats, of course, served with great distinction as a member of the house and senate in indiana, as well as the u.s. ambassador to germany. during a long career in public service, he told me as we were coming up here today, he has twice failed retirement. he wants to return to the u.s.

senate for a second time in the senate. he became ambassador to germany, then he became director of national intelligence. he has had a long and distinguished career in intelligence. as i mentioned, he is a true friend of the hudson institute . before he left to be ambassador to germany, he and his wife governance ofe their foundation for american renewal to the hudson institute. in the trump administration, he has been interested with a job with deep responsibilities. he serves as the head of the u.s. intelligence community overseeing and direct and implementation of the u.s. intelligence program and at him as the principal advisor of the security council and the homeland security council on intelligence matters related to national security. when he is in town and when the

president is in town to do the daily presidential intelligence briefs with senior members of the intelligence community. as a mentioned earlier, we are truly honored to have him with us today. the moneyudson as of to make remarks on a number of critical issues, including several security in the u.s. and abroad. and to do so on the eve of the historic summit in houses key between president trump -- helsinki between president trump and president putin. a discussion with the hudson institute distinguished fellow walter russell mead, who also needs no introduction here. he is the dean of observance of foreign policy and in addition to being a distinguished fellow, he is a global view columnist for the wall street journal, and also the james chase professor of international affairs at bard college. without further do, i would like

to welcome director coats to the hudson institute podium. [applause] dan: ken, thank you very much. we enjoy hudson's presence in indiana for a time. the former director mitch daniels became governor of indiana. in the meantime, to move to the middle of the country to get a different perspective than what we had on the coast. i had the privilege of working with the people there, we understand where you came back here, moving into more foreign policy focused staff, that is what happens -- stuff, that is what happens here. but we do appreciate the fact that you still value indiana. some of your employees may be missing the ease of living and

cost of living in indiana, relative to washington, not to mention the commute to work. nevertheless, it is very nice of me to be able to be here with you and just to lay some groundwork for what i think is one of the, if not the top challenge that we face, in terms of threats to our country, our people and our processes in the future. so before i sit down with walter global about a range of threats that we face, i would like to focus my initial remarks on the growing cyber threat to our nation's security. specifically, i would like to put it in the context of the current cyber threat, in terms of the threats we had in historical context, and define who is the most responsible, and what they are attempting to do, and then discuss the

intelligence community's response to that. get up, morning when i i'm given a roundtable of news of what happened yesterday, around the world. and almost without fail, the longest section of this news roundup, is on cyber issues. detailing multiple reports of cyber attacks and alerts . this issue affects all of us, and it is increasingly affecting numerous aspects of our daily lives, as many of you are familiar with. you only need to go back less than two decades to put the current cyber threat into proper context. in 2001, r four are ability because of our intelligence and law enforcement that produced

silos of information. at the time, intelligence and law enforcement communities where identifying activities as suggested that an attack was coming potentially in the united states. it was in the months prior to september, 2001, when coding to then cia director, the system was looking red. here we are, nearly two decades later, and i'm here to say that the warning lights are blinking red again. today, the digital infrastructures and services country is literally under attack. every day, foreign actors in the worst offenders being russia china iran and north korea, every day, they are penetrating her digital infrastructure and conducting a range of cyber intrusions and attacks against targets in the united states.

targets range from u.s. businesses, the federal government, including our military, state and local governments, academic and financial institutions, and elements of our critical infrastructure, just to name a few. these attacks come in different forms, some are tailored to achieve very tangible goals but others are implemented for strategic services including, the possibility of a crippling cyber attacks against our critical infrastructure. all of these desperate efforts, share a common purpose to exploit america's openness in order to undermine our long-term competitive advantage. in regards to state actions, russia has been the most aggressive foreign actor, no question. they continued their efforts to undermine our democracy. in regards to the upcoming midterm elections, i think there may have been some confusion between what we perceive now

compared to what we saw in 2016. because the department of homeland security noted, are not yet seen the kind of electoral interference in specific states in voter databases that we experienced and 60. however, we fully realize that we are just one click of the keyboard overlay from a similar situation itself. therefore, we are saying aggressive attempts to manipulate social and spent propaganda focusing on hot button issues that are intended to exasperate social and political divisions. despite public statements by the kremlin, we continue to see individuals affiliated with the st. petersburg-based internet agency creating new social media accounts, masquerading as americans and using these to

draw attention to divisive issues. we have learned just before this meeting, the indictment of 12 russian military intelligence officials relative to their role in 2016. focusing on the potential impact of these actions, honor midterm elections, this is the more important part. these actions are persistent, they are per se evasive, and they are meant to undermine american democracy on a daily basis. regardless, of whether it is election time. russian actors and others are exploiting all possibilities in our critical infrastructure as well. the fbi, in coordination with international partners, detect russian government actors targeting government and the energy, nuclear, water, and aviation, and manufacturing sectors.

the warning signs are there. the system is blinking and it is why i believe you are at eight. today, like the status of the intelligence community in 2001, we are much more embedded in ensuring better information between agencies. the evolving cyber threat is illuminating new daily challenges of how we treat information. we are dealing with information silos of a different kind, including between the private and public sectors. here's the good news, as i previously just mentioned, intelligence community today, is more integrated than it has ever been. we are sharing information across agencies at all levels. in regards to the midterms, we are partnering with the dhs and fbi to provide support,

information, and grants to election officials to all 50 states and we will continue to support this effort. and regarding the larger cyber threat issue, the president has signed a executive order strictly the cyber security of networks and critical infrastructure which, the president has a hold on government resulting in a number of actions that we are not taking to strengthen defense against i.t. guidelines. the president has also authorize the use of all available tools of state power including attribution, criminal indictments, economic levers, to punish malicious cyber actors. our leaders at the national security council consider this is a top priority. we are continuously pursuing actions on this issue. i have had numerous talks with

our new national security adviser and members of the nsc relative to the importance of raising this to a top issue. within the government, we are working continuously to the tent -- the ted cyber threats. we have a cyber threat intelligence center that builds the understanding of cyber threats to inform decision-makers. the department of homeland security and the fbi are demonstrating leadership rather than applying a more assertive federal response. my former colleagues in the house and senate are bringing

significant attention to the threat of cyber and have expressed strong support for legislative action. having said that, we have to do better in what we deliver to our customers, how we get it to them, and the speed by which it received. today, those that have been illuminated. how rigidly still at what it comes to public discourse. the self-interest has created independence rather than complementary lines of effort and awareness. as a result, we need to think differently about our customers. ways, the nature of the threat requires that we, the national security community, treat the private sector and american people as intelligence customers. that is why you will see us talking about this threat more vocally and why you will continue to see us publish unclassified assessments and statements to inform the american people. everyone, if we are to succeed in dealing with this threat, must take ownership of the challenge.

take the government, the private sector, and the american people all doing their part to better position our country for the future. as a government, we are having a more open dialogue about this threat. in particular, we need to provide the information available to us to the private sector into the public to better inform their decision-making. we need the private sector to see the public good in developing greater protections in the software, information systems, and applications in the market. we also need to american people to verify the credibility of the sources of information upon which they base their decisions. whether those sources, our social media reports, cable news, or newspapers, it is essential that we all critical -- all apply critical thinking to all sources of information.

this evolution in the ic's approach, is part of the transformation for which we are driving threat that i see in coming years. we also need the american people effort,esult of this which brought together the heads and deputies of all the intelligence community agencies, all 17, is a new vision for the future of the intelligence community. we call it, "intelligence community 2025." where do we need to be? what kind of capabilities do we need to have? what kind of insights do we need to have in terms of the threats that we face. we are putting together significant efforts to stay ahead of the game, head of the curve, to deliver to our customers starting with the president, working through his policymakers for both the

private and government sector. what i would like to do at this particular time -- thank you for the invitation. i know that we will have hopefully a good discussion about this, looking at the larger threats, whatever questions that might need to be addressed. i would much rather do that then continue to talk up here, even though as a former senator, we love to talk. [laughter] so, thank you very much. [applause] >> i have to say, that is one of the most dramatic comparisons i have heard a senior government official make, saying that the warning indicators now are comparable to what they were in

the months leading up to 9/11. different threat, but it's there. presumably we are looking at anything from major attacks on infrastructure to massive attacks on the electronic communications and all? >> we are. and it is not just from the states that i identified, we see this from criminal organizations that for nefarious purposes are using cyber. we see this from nonstate actors, from terrorist groups and criminal groups. we see this from hackers around the world. we see this as a game, or just for the hell of it -- take something done, break into the defense community, break into wall street, on and on, to kids

in the basement, or sitting in a dorm. it is pervasive. but the real threats, the sophisticated threats of course, come from the states that have the capability and the resources to be able to really create great damage. >> so there is a significant gap between the capabilities of these states and other various criminal terrorists organizations that are out there? >> well, in terms of having the resources to develop the new tools, to have the ability to adapt with agility, to up their game, in a sense of the game of -- in a sense, it is a game of whack a mole or chess, where you see a threat and you put in a prevention, but the threat then moves over. the source moves over here, you stop it there, and you try to get it over here, and you see that across the board.

it is a day-to-day effort in terms of protecting your people. >> when you read the news and listen to what people say, it's one story after another one sensitive american database getting some of the real crown jewels of our community being taken over. a, that makes a wonder, how defensive army and is that going to change? b, it makes me wonder, are we defensive, or is the cyber universe simply a story of american secrets being stolen on a mass basis to make its broader -- basis. its broader than that. we have the resources and capabilities. i don't think anybody's better

than we are, nevertheless, the range of vulnerabilities is out there because the technology is advancing so rapidly, and as i said, this game of chess, we make a move to protect us or identify, and they make a move to go around. we have to be aware of that and never be complacent about what we have now, where we are, because our people out there trying to jump over us. >> and does seem like a domain where the offense enjoys benefits over the defense, is it that? >> yes, it has been frustrating for me because i have a lifetime of watching nfl football games, going to prevent defense, -- in a field goal, you are on point and you go in to prevent defense, and it opens up all kinds of holes. next in go, the other team makes

the goal. it is so frustrating if you just rely on defense to win. so that is why, when i was in the senate and now, i continue , of course, my job is different now, i don't do policy -- i continue to support and encourage any offensive capability. if anybody knows what punch back is, more than donald trump, we need to approach punch back in the right way, if we are going to send the right signal to people -- "there was a price to pay. you come after us and there is a price to pay." the less you do that, the more people are encouraged to staff got nothing to lose. i think combining offensive measures with defensive measures is necessary to deal with this issue. >> the constitution does

expressly provide for letters of marked reprisal. of these four countries that you mentioned, russia, china, north korea and iran, were you given that in order of their capabilities? >> yes, but maybe from different perspectives. china has different capabilities, resources that perhaps russia doesn't have. but, they don't have the same intent. what is serious about the russians is their intent. they have capabilities, but it is their intent to undermine our basic values, undermine democracy, create wedges between us and our allies and we've seen this area had in fact, the indictment today shows exactly what they were trying to do, or what they have done, through their military intelligence, relative to elections. and as i was mentioning in my statement, we see the ongoing

efforts, it is not just the elections. it is a strategy. the intent that comes out of russia is different from the intent -- china wants to steal our stuff. they want to build technology, intellectual property, technology -- they want to try to change our vision of china and its intentions, but not through the same kind of means that the russians use. so you have to put those two in context. now, iran and north korea -- so, north korea, we are not at a pause, but we are at a point where -- let us see where these negotiations go relative to our relationship with north korea. with iran, they just take all kinds of malicious activities against us, from ballistic missiles, feeding terrorism, on and on.

but on the cyber, they potentially are somewhat limited, because their economy is not doing well. they may be spread too thin or whatever, so -- probably in that order. but the top two, russia and china, they are there every day. >> speaking of north korea, have you observed any difference in north korea's behavior since the singapore summit? >> um, i cannot get into the classified part of what we see, but it has always been a hard target. we have significantly upped our game for this purpose. reagan was "trust and verify," that is what i came to congress with. right now, i am the "verify" guy.

the intelligence community is a verify community. we are focusing on what is happening, both before and now current -- subsequent to the talks. but, we are at the beginning of this and we will continue to evaluate it. obviously, north korea is probably trying to figure out, ok, i mean, we are at the beginning of negotiations, so i am not going to give up the ship right now. so, we will see how that plays out, but it is too early to determine definitively i think, that this is where they are going to and up. -- where they are going to end up. >> nothing really dramatic. >> it has been some reporting, some of it accurate and some of it inaccurate. there are some continuing activities, but some of those that have been reported have not

been verified. >> let us get back to the election and disinformation operations. it seems to me that social media is one of the places, at least if a look at 2016, where disinformation is very big. is that the case now? >> i think i know that in my remarks, it's very prevailing in and sophisticated. who would've thought that isis, using the seventh century barbarian measures of imposing physical harm and death on people, those tactics, would be so sophisticated in also using cyber early on in social media, to recruit and train, and still, still, inspire. the defeat in the desert has not resulted in the defeat of terrorist organizations like isis and al qaeda.

we see them spread around the world and it still remains a terrorist threats to us, and social media is one of the ways in which they continue to raise money, recruit, train, inspire and we have to be aware of that. >> when you go to the social media companies and you say, your platform is being targeted and used in a very, very specific way by these different hostile groups, do you get the cooperation you think you need from these companies? >> we have the obligation to learn and warm, and we do. -- learn and warn, and we do. we are in the process of working with social media companies in terms of taking responsibility to what they put out, we've had some success. we've had some interactions which haven't been as successful as we would like.

we will continue to do that, but there's a lot of brand protection, a lot of -- well, listen, if we do that and our competitors don't, then we are at a disadvantage -- we try to talk about the responsibility relative to their commitment to help us address these threats to keep our people safe. >> so there a real range in risk wants, pretty solid and positive to, well, i don't think we can -- >> what's interesting to me, we only collect against foreign intelligence. so we know a lot less about the american people than our adversaries. and we know a lot less than some of our social media outlets know about their customers. >> google knows us better than the federal government. >> absolutely. >> i am not sure if i feel good, feel bad, i did know how i feel about that. [laughter]

so you are saying that they were trying to polarize us and magnify differences. this reminds us of what the communists used to do with the cold war, the soviet union with their propaganda technique. i think maybe some of our younger members of the audience may not know what this is all about, if you could explain to them. >> when the wall came out, without -- when the wall came down, we thought that this would be a new country, a reset. and for a while, it was a different relationship. then, russia reached out and said, you know, maybe we have gone too far. why don't we ask the guy who ran the kgb, he is a pretty savvy guy, in conducting everything that the kgb did and still does, under a different acronym. and, that was a game changer. so i described it as the russian

bear after the fall of the wall, went into the cave into hibernation. he's out of the cave and hungry. and, he is clawing more territory, more influence and using the same tactics that we saw in the cold war and more. the more results in a lot of that in cyber. >> it is interesting that during the cold war, they had the advantage of communist parties and networks of supporters around the world. they don't quite have that, although they seem to be trying to rebuild loyal parties and factions, but it looks like on balance with the cyber tools, they can actually do a better job than the soviet union could have with this kind of information and propaganda. the ago they are good at lying, propaganda, deception, seeding dissension among adversaries.

the president made some comments about nato and closing comments -- they were ones i really thought were important because if nato comes unglued, vladimir putin wins. he's trying to seize that potential opportunity and i think we need to stand up against that. >> so the pattern is not so much that the russians are supporting one side or another in a political battle, sometimes they may do that, but they were trying to get both sides more divided, is that one other methods? >> whether that was their method, that is what they succeeded in doing. it really was designed as a strategy, and they have had some success.

>> will can we do to counter this? >> transparency. i talked to my colleagues in different nations, particularly in europe. the more we provide our people with what we know the russians are doing, the more we can inform our public, not to just believe, take for granted what's put out in the media is truth, but we need to have more critical thinking. we are barraged by media, by breaking news, by news outlets rushing to be the first because if we don't do it, three others are going to do it, and our ratings will go down and their ratings will go up. so there is no filter between information that comes into the system, there's no editor as we used to have in the paper. there is nobody sitting in an office upstairs saying, we have to run this by the boss before reprinted.

it will be too late to do that. -- before we print it. it'll be too late to do that. we want the news now. we want to access it on our iphone right away so we have to inform our people just don't believe everything you hear out there. we are agencies that seek the truth. we cannot politicize it, we cannot shade it. the truth is what it is, just the facts. i think our public needs to gain some ability to ask questions and seek verification before we jump to conclusions and rush to the camera to say, "i just heard this," and "well!" and the next day, on page 13, that was not exactly what should've been done.

>> if you had a chance to speak with mr. vladimir putin at this sort of crucial period in u.s. russian relations, what would you say? >> my message would be, we know what you are doing, and we know that you know what you are doing, and look, if your goal is to strengthen russia and the in the proper way, we can cooperate with you. but if your goal is to strengthen russia at a cost to us, if you will be a paranoid nation thinking, any time in the next 24 hours, we are going to take over russia, this paranoia about democracy, we are not going to get anywhere. isn't it best for both sides here to basically say, instead

of taking down, what we build up? we build up? the decision is up to you. we know you run the shots. we know you're making the decision. you can't pass it off to some hacker down somewhere where we don't know. we know what you do. so, you make the choice. but if you want to stay in this, tit-for-tat, we will beat you. that ronald reagan, basically saying, hey, you want to take us on? ok, we will throw everything we've got into it, you through everything you've got into it, then you make a decision. they made a decision and outdid us. we have the capacity to do that. >> to get from the sort of disinformation, and with the elections coming up, you hear a lot of anxiety about the

american, you know, -- whether it is the voting machines or other elements of the voting process in the midterms, how confident can we be that we are defending the security of our political system? >> we have to be confident because if we can have -- if we don't have confidence when you walk into the polls and put your x next in a candidate or party that you support, when that becomes questioned, it undermines our democracy. >> which sounds like somebody's strategic goal, to undermine that. >> right. it has to be solid 50 state, look what happened down in florida, in one area of one county, that threw us into a constitutional crisis. think what happened today if we find out one state that might've

been the critical state. >> in control of the senate and the house. we have talked to all 50 state officials, governors. we are providing grants, we are looking at those who provide the machines, were trying to back it up with paper so we have redundancy on it. we just need to throw everything at it to ensure the american people that we are doing -- to assure the american people that we are doing everything possible to make it a fair election and not massaged by anybody from the outside. >> as you look at the progress we are making and of the obstacles that remain, do you feel that on the whole, we are on track to have a safe and secure election? >> i think we can see in a

bipartisan way in the house and senate, we see the executive branch stepping up in time, we see the states reaching out for help. we have to do everything we can to assure our public that their vote counts. >> i know that there have been some reports of different independent groups monitoring states' readiness for the election and there seem to be a wide gap in some states looking pretty good, and some other states including the state of the hanging chad seem to be a bit behind. >> we got to get them up-to-date before the election. we need to ensure that every state is ready. >> are the laggards doing better at this point? >> i think they are. nobody was to be the one that takes a down because they did not have their act together. we are hearing that.

we work with fbi, dhs, our intelligence community, warnings and so on and so forth. we have worked with all 50 states. it's ongoing, it's going to have to keep on going right up until the day of the auction. >> and what you are hearing back from congress and others is a sense of on a bipartisan basis, people in washington think the work you guys are doing is sufficient and proper? >> i think you are seeing that. republicans are teaming up with democrats both in the senate and the house to ensure that everyone is on board. this would certainly be a key if one party or the other party said -- they are not doing the right thing, that would be terrible. >> well, we have been witnessing this on another subject, and we have seen the impact of it. >> what, really worries you

most, when you think about it scenarios that might unfold based on the kind of unrivaled exposure you have to the threats that the country faces? what are the things that really keep you up at night? do you ever sleep? >> [laughter] restlessly, sometimes. when you think about 9/11, two planes flying into one another, towers, onetwin if eitherntagon, one of those planes or all three of them had any kind of weapon of mass destruction we would be talking about deaths in the 300,000 or 3 million or more. so, preventing proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, particularly in terrorist groups that are not under any state

control, have a theology or an victory is killing the opposition, whether by beheading or through nuclear device, that's one. the second is frankly, a cyber 9/11. think about new england, in january, the grid going down for three days. a lot of people are going to suffer and die. think about taking away a hit on the banks, that wipes people's lifetime savings, and we don't know where it came from. we don't know where the money is, and on and on.

so, you do toss and turn at night about scenarios that you hope will never happen. >> in your view, is the intelligence community as a whole getting the kind of resources and support that it needs to do the job it needs to be done? >> we are. thanks to this administration and the congress, we have really upped our ante, and we have been provided the resources we need to do what we need to do. we have some terrific capabilities. we have some innovative people, we have some young people who -- i am a liberal arts major, i should not be in the operational success of cyber or technology. fortunately, we've hired a lot of really capable smart people, a lot of young people coming in that have technological and stem capabilities that i never even dreamed of.

so, every visit and make, and i make a lot of them to our various agencies and their components, i so impressed with the technical capabilities would -- we have. we are an innovative country, democracy and freedom produces some great stuff if it is done a right way. >> thank you director. senator, and director, investor, thank you for the work we did -- you have been doing. i think everybody here and watching us on television, appreciates the importance of what you do and wishes you every possible success. >> i would like to say something -- i came across this article couple of days ago about what people may be thinking about donald trump's unorthodox foreign policy, and it says with -- we should brace ourselves for a wild ride. guess who wrote that?

walter russell mead, wall street journal a couple days ago. i highlighted it and cut it out. it's a pleasure to be with you. great to be back and hudson -- great to be back in hudson. thank you for asking me to be here. >> i know the director has to get out quickly as you can imagine his schedule is packed, so if the audience could sit while he leaves quickly to get onto whatever he's doing next -- i don't think you can tell us what he is doing next -- but, thank you again for coming. we really appreciate it. [applause] and, as he leaves, i just want to thank everybody in hudson. meeting together, it's a terrific opportunity and an honor for us, and i hope that the folks who are watching this in streaming enjoyed it. we are sorry we couldn't take questions from the audience, but i did my best to channel what i

hope other questions on most minds. thank you very much. [applause] [inaudible] >> tonight, it is my honor and privilege to announce that i will nominate judge brett kavanaugh the united states supreme court. >> mr. president, i am grateful to you. i am humbled by our confidence in me. >> brett kavanaugh of the united states courts of appeals is president trump's nominee for the supreme court. >> i am pleased with the , after talking to him yesterday morning, i look forward to supporting his nomination and doing whatever i

can to ensure his bipartisan confirmation. if judge cap not is confirmed, women's freedom to make decisions about their bodies, reform store health care system, the quality of our era and water, and much more will be at risk. i cannot think of anybody who was more qualified to serve as the next associate justice of the supreme court. >> follow the confirmation process on c-span through congress as judge kavanagh meets with key senators, the senate confirmation hearings, and the vote. watch live on c-span, watch anytime on c-span.org. ♪ bus is traveling across the country on our 50 capital structure get the bus stopped in anchorage, alaska, asking folks what the most important issue in alaska was. >> the economy is at the heart of all of the struggles we are having right now.

the state of alaska has been enabled for several years now. we experienced a homelessness issue like has not been seen before. out,ve poverty reaching people camping in our parks, people struggling. we have neighbors trying to figure out how to coexist. the state in the feds are not investing in the critical public resources that we need to ensure the lowest among us are taken care of. issue tost important me is protecting the arctic national wildlife refuge. i was there last week with friends. beautifulnbelievably place that is iconic in the same way that yellowstone national park is. 2017 snuck in a provision to allow drilling on the coastal plain of the refuge. we are doing everything we can to stop that drilling.

alaska natives are also working to stop that. alaska is a lot more than just oil and gas. those who live on the land and embrace the fact that the caribou help them survive and are an important way of their -- part of their way of life are active in this movement and we would like to dual we can to protect this iconic place. >> alaska has among the highest health care costs in the country. if the federal government could restructure american health care, that would go a long way to help the state. >> the most pressing issue i hear about has to be concerns about crime. efforts to increase the police force have been yielding gains in this area. people are still very worried. as a mother of three kids, that is an issue for our family. it is one of the reasons why i chose to run for office.

>> be sure to join us july 21 and 22nd when will feature a visit to alaska. watch alaska weekend on c-span. listen on the c-span radio app. our next guest gave a personal story when it comes to the topic of childhood separations. couple970, a guatemalan decided to send their daughter to the u.s.. that young girl was me. representative nora torres joining us on our set. for the rest you did not see that, tell the rest of that story. that point to hear. -- here. guest: first of all, thank you

for allowing me to be here and joining you. it was a tough week for me, that week, in the context of what we were seeing. i had spent one day in san diego, visiting the children, visiting the centers, the jail that holds the parents. this was the first time that, on the floor, actually talked about myself. i really do not talk about where i come from. it is a sad story, so it is not some and that i often talk about. but it is a story of many immigrants that come here to the u.s., whether they come on their own or they are sent here like i was, by my parents. a very difficult decision, like i said on the floor that day. i do not know if i would have the courage to do that for my children today. host: when it comes to your political career, what did you do before you became a member of congress? i work as a 911 dispatcher in the city of los

angeles for 17 and a half years. host: we heard announcements from the administration there is a closing of the separation process. talk about that news but talk about the process of reuniting children with family separated at the border. guest: there really is no process of reuniting the children, which is hard for american families to stand. that here is a government, the u.s. government, that is supposed to have it together, but yet we are taking babies there are still nursing from notr mothers, and we are tracking them as we should be. we are not ensuring that they are taken care of when they are put in a foster care or wherever they are sent. babies these centers for -- that is no way to treat people who are running away from

unimaginable situations of crime, of public corruption, of gangs. very serious situations. host: even the announcement earlier that there are reunification taking place -- are not believe that or there is still yet to do? guest: there is a lot to do on that. let's go back and talk about, as --other -- when i had a baby and i do not know if you are a dad -- but when you have a baby at the hospital, they put a bracelet on the mother and they put a bracelet on the baby, so that you are able to identify belongs with who -- who belongs with whom. the u.s. government did not do any of that. in some cases, they took photos of the mom and baby. in many cases, they did not. if a child is not able to speak their name, how can they recognize who their parent is,

especially a young baby who may be reunited with a total stranger because there have been away from them so long? reunited somee families, they have not been able to reunite the over 3000 children that are still out there. host: our guest will be here until 9:00, when the house comes in today. torress joining -- norma joining us. (202) 748-8000 for democrats. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. independents, (202) 748-8002. you can also tweak questions or comments on our twitter feed, @cspanwj. our first call comes from california, lancaster, republican line. glenn is on with representative torres. caller: good morning. i was born in oakland, california. i would like to know, your

parents sent you to a sponsor, correct? or did they just send you to the border to let america take care of you? also, we had a whole bunch of under aet signed up constitutional daca. -- under unconstitutional daca. they used the social security system to sign-up for this, which is another burden on the american people. this is economical warfare by these people. they can get in line and do it just like everyone else. our immigration system is not broken. people everyllion year -- host: ok, got you. guest: thank you for your interest in my background and how i got here. my parents did send me to live ,ith my father's oldest brother who was already living and

working and paying taxes and paid into the social security system in whittier, california. i think i might have wanted to rather live with my father's youngest brother, because he had a family, but unfortunately, he was serving in the u.s. navy at the time. and was deployed overseas, so i was not able to join him. you made a statement about the and youho come here believe they are a drain on our social security system. i think that is an uninformed opinion, and i want to encourage you to read more about what is actually happening. these folks are paying taxes, paying into social security systems, and they are not able to draw from that.

because they are undocumented. i wish there was a process -- our immigration system is absolutely broken. there is no process. people wait in line 30 years, just to be heard, to get an appointment area that is something that all of us, you included, are interested in, in trying to come up with a better way of addressing these issues. host: trace from massachusetts, -- grace from massachusetts, independent line. caller: thank you for taking my call. i want to applaud you for being involved in immigration, because this is a stain on who we are. i look at these children who are coming from these gang-filled c ountries with more guns that shoot and you are afraid of your children being indoctrinated in that system in order to survive. it is incredible to me that we do not open up our hearts to

these people. and then there is the separation. i am a mother of six children. i am pretty old right now. my fourth baby got sick and was put into a room, and at that time, they would not let the parents stay with a child. when he came home after they released him, i had a hard time with that child. he was fighting me, and he was only about 18 months old. he was not the same little boy. it took time. i said to my pediatrician, i was ready to have my fifth child. i said am i going to go through this again? he said yes, you are. and i did. when i was having my fifth chil d, when i was came home -- when i came home, i was being slapped . so where is the compassion for these children? why do we support a president who does not stick to one thing

at a time and result that before floating off to another area? for yourank you understanding and compassion towards these children. as a mother myself, and grandmother of a three-year-old navy, i totally agree with you that -- baby, i totally agree with you that this is a black guy -- a black eye on america. this is what we shame other countries about -- putting small children in cages, freezing cells, is no way to treat a young child coming here with her parents, seeking help . i want to encourage you to continue to stay involved. although, yes, members of congress, your elected representatives, or a big voice. we are doing everything we can. when it comes to family values,

family separations, like we are seeing at the border and in our nation now, it will really take --ple like who are involved maybe not affiliated to one party or another. and that is ok. we care about people. that is what this country is known for. we want an orderly way of ensuring that, when people come to our border asking for help, that we are there to help. most of all, i want to tell you and reassure you that there are members like me that are working on identifying the root causes and trying to fix and help in those countries. we understand we cannot help every person that comes to our border. so we are working very hard with those governments, and specifically, i have been working on the northern triangle to see the youth there sees a

future for themselves. but there are job training opportunities. to live in a safe environment. some of us are working in a bipartisan way to address those issues. host: the department of homeland security meeting with central american governments to talk about those issues, with one of those two discourage migrants from heading to america at all. guest: this is something i saw when i visited -- i was invited to visit guatemala with vice very early inn, my first term here in congress. the government of guatemala, at that time, was doing psa's. some of that was with the assistance of the u.s. government. i think we should continue to talk about that in these countries. they started a process of creating shelters within the

northern triangle countries. people,here unaccompanied, teenagers could go to and ask for help and be processed in these countries. to prevent them from walking that 1000 miles north and that very dangerous path through mexico. however, president trump did away with that. i think that is something we need to look at. host: from minnesota, republican line. caller: good morning. laws that americans have two of a. -- have to obey. these parents are causing the problem by dragging the children in appearance some of them do not even belong to the parents. we need to stick to the laws, and everyone should obey them. guest: thank you. we absolutely have laws. we absolutely have legislators.

the responsibility of legislators is to ensure that the laws that we are applying, that we are asking our first responders and law enforcement agencies to comply by, to enforce, are actually laws that are applicable to current times. i think this is an opportunity for all of us. is to be lawmakers. if there is a problem, we ought to be focusing on it and fixing it. host: from maryland, independent line, chuck. been listening to these conversations about immigration policy and the taking of children from their parents. i have looked at this from long and far. my problem with this is the parents do not accept any responsibility for their actions. they throw the children out there like they are victims of a

committed by a tyrant president. i do not believe that. i am a taxpayer. if i park somewhere they posted on, they take my car, and i pay for it. if these people apply for citizenship, go through the proper obligations, i have every right to believe they should become citizens. i have no problem with that. but when you throw them on the of freedom and say that these people are being abused -- i think they are being treated better than any place they have been their entire lives. but they do not credit that to the government did this is hard situation for a lot of people. host: thank you. guest: i agree with you -- this is a very difficult situation that has been created i this administration at our border. it did need -- it did not need to be created.

we certainly did not need to be put in a very negative limelight with our allies around the world. arehe extent that people here, throwing their kids -- many of these families, you should know, actually presenting themselves. they are not trying to sneak over or under any fence or trying to cross illegally. they are actually presenting themselves and their children at the border and asking for asylum. the law of this country. when people ask for asylum, there is a process, an orderly process, and it is illegal for us to turn them away. so i want to encourage you to get informed and find out more information about what is actually happening. i do not believe that you would you have if you truly knew what is happening

down there. host: a story from yesterday saying the administration formerly started the asylum crackdown yesterday. could you expand on that? guest: we are not processing many of the asylum cases. they are being received by threats. they are being told they are separating the parents from their children, very young children in many cases. what they are saying to these dances -- paarent -- these parents is we will give you back your child. you have to sign that you are relinquishing your right to ask for asylum, and that you will be sent back to your own country. those are the options. if people want to see their children back and be reunited, they have to give up their right to ask for asylum. that is incredible that this

country is violating these basic principles that are in place to protect people who are fleeing from very dangerous situations. host: you heard from some critics that some of -- some requesting a silent get assigned a date and do not come back on that date. guest: in some cases, that is an issue. the people who come in with young children, that is not an issue. i believe the number is 90% of those folks who are given a date to appear in court actually appear in court. maryland on a court immigration court date with some of my colleagues and observed very young children -- imagine a year-old, having to face a judge on their own without an attorney. the folks that we saw, because we were there only for the first part of that session, did have

an attorney. a common courtesy that the court extends to those attorneys is they will see those cases first. but the last couple of hours of that session included children that were presenting themselves with absolutely no attorney. host: representative norma torres, democrat from california. this is from california, democrat line. frank, hello. caller: how are you doing? good morning. guest: good morning. caller: i work for the federal bureau of prisoners in california. you know we have had 1000 detainees in our facilities. the main thing, questions i have asked, is what will happen to these detainees later down the

world -- road? as federal officers, we do a good job of housing these people, but we are limited in resources. a lot of problems we run into is the language barriers. i know a lot of detainees have asked when are they going to go back home? but the biggest problem we have in our facility, in the bureau, is the lack of resources when it comes to staffing. host: thanks. guest: thank you for your service. victorvillee facility, not to visit these cases, but as a state legislator. i did a lot of work around theon issues, representing men's central prison in my own district. i know you have a very tough job. thank you for calling in and bringing this to my attention. absolutely.

this is a perfect example of what is happening in this administration. people are being sent out. law enforcement officers are having to deal with incidents and people with very little or absolutely zero training. to the extent that they are trying to do their job. remember -- the folks were being detained in this prison, many of them, the crimes they committed was coming to the border, presenting themselves, and asking for asylum. the not know about background of every single one of those 1000 people, but many of those are there. for these officers to keep this population away and protected from the hard-core criminals that are also in this prison is an extremely difficult job. many of the people that are coming from guatemala -- in 26temala, there are 24,

indigenous languages that are spoken. many of them do not even speak spanish. some resources are needed. if the federal government is to continue with this, we need to ensure that our law enforcement officers have resources that they need, get the training that they need, in order to deal with these issues that they are now having to deal with. host: roll call reported late last month that there were three thatlators that one it -- wanted to present a bill to abolish immigrations and customs enforcement. initially, what did you think about that effort? guest: it is unfortunate that, out of desperation, people are moving in different directions. it is unfortunate that, as much as we have talked about child separation, as many people that have, out of republican and democratic districts and said

"we are americans," and we will not tolerate this, there has been no action from republican leadership to take up a bill to ensure that first responders, law enforcement officers, like frank, have resources that they need in order to deal with the situation. and that i.c.e. has a directive we give them and are operating under those directives. unfortunately, right now, i.c.e. is only hearing from the trump administration. i.c.e. does a lot more than immigration, then detaining and the hoarding people. there is another bureau within i.c.e. that is responsible for homeland security, such as investigating kidnappings, investigating drug trafficking -- if we do not like the active of i.c.e., then we need to

change that. but we need to own that as numbers of congress. we need to stop allowing this administration to bully us into a corner and coming up with on an on solutions like this. if we abolish i.c.e., who will be next? it is the directive we are giving personnel that needs to change. host: let's go to linda, st. louis, democrat line. caller: good morning. i want to say that, in my 70 years, i have never been more ids -- disgusted and appalled with what my government is doing. i see these parents as grave that they would want their children to have a better life. i would willingly give up my life to protect my child and make sure my child has a decent, safe life. that is all i have to say about it. you.: thank

you are not alone when you talk about that. when we look and listen to the horrific photos and soundbites coming out of these institutions were people are being held. as parents, as american citizens, you have a right to speak out when you're not happy with how your government is performing. i encourage you to continue doing that, continue to write letters, continue to make the calls to all of our offices. as much as everyone else has been doing. host: will there be any more hearings or action on child separations? guest: right now, the representative, speaker ryan, posted anything to the have refused to bring any of the bills. so at this point, no. representative norma torres, democrat from california, serving the 35th

district and also the >> c-span's washington journal, live every day with news and issues that impact you. coming up sunday morning, we will look at the ongoing trade disputes between the u.s., canada, china, and mexico. also come the national reviews robert for bargain -- robert verbruggin looks at disability. saturday morning, join the discussion. this weekend on american history tv on c-span3. eastern,at 8:00 university of connecticut professor on the reconstruction

era after the civil war. america, theeal silent french film dedicated to america's efforts in world war i. sunday at 2:00 eastern, the world war museum symposium marking the anniversary of saving private ryan. on american artifacts, the u.s. army heritage and education center annual living history event. watch american history tv this weekend on c-span3. a new report by the brookings institution looks at insurance markets in 10 states. and how the affordable care implemented in different parts of the country. the three-hour event held in washington, d.c., the study's author presented findings and health policy al