we do have far more material, and i compliment the administration, but the clinton library and archives -- we have far more material is then presented by the senate judiciary committee then we have ever had for any nominee, and i think you look at it and say, was she acting as good counsel in the clinton administration? did she give advice, which she would be expected just as she was given advice when she served as a clerk for justice marshall. it gives you some idea of their legal ability, but it does not tell you what type of justice they are going to be. hugo black was a member of the coup coquelin. he was the united states senator. -- the kkk. he was the united states senator. he helped put together brown vs. board of education. john paul stevens today is not what i thought he might be as a justice when i voted for him 35 years ago. i am pleased with the way he has turned out. he has a certain amount of saying that gerald ford was president and should be able to say who he nominates, and i thought john paul stevens was more conservative than someone i would have recommended for a de

bill clinton has comments about elena kagan and his service during her administration. that does it for today's "washington journal." we will be back tomorrow morning and next we will have the interview with senator patrick leahy. thank you for watching. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] . . >> mr. chairman, i wonder if you can comment on elana kagen's writings about 20 years ago abthe con23ir78ation process about how she talked about nominees avoiding substantive questions. do you think it would be appropriate for her to respond about whether row v wade was correctly decided? >> you actually asked several questions. one, how i feel about her writing. i thought she was right. she probably may have second thoughts about that now being a nominee. i told hers that one of the areas she is going to be asked, the question about how forts coming. it's been my experience that nominees to the supreme court shouldn't be less than less forth coming. i think she will be asked a number of questions. on ro

it went from the clinton administration into the bush administration and went from there. in the course of that, broadband proliferated wonderfully. we see great innovation and investment. it was called the edge of the internet, devices and computers and applications of software. that is exploding, unfettered by regulation. we also want to see innovation within the networks of the internet. the age and the core are converging from the consumer's perspective. they do not care how the services are delivered, as long as they have competition and innovation and lower prices that they can enjoy. that is what is happening now. what has been proposed creates an asymmetrical market that places the thumb of government on the core of the internet and says we can have unfettered innovation at the edge, but at the court it will have a mother my eymay i approach. dsl had to play catch-up because it was regulated. we saw proliferation really explode it wonderfully. wireless has been largely unregulated. i am very concerned that the commission may be poised to start heavily regulating th

kagan herself once noted, during her years in the clinton administration, she spent most of her time not serving as an attorney but as a policy advisor, and her notes and memoranda reveal that all too often her policy advise and her actions were based first and foremost on what was good for democrats. this kind of thinking might be okay for a political advisor, but there is a place for politics and for advocating for one's party, and that place is not on the supreme court. a political advisor may be expected to seek political advantage, but judges have a different task. we don't know how elena kagan will apppy the law because she has no judicial record, little experience as a private practitioner, and no significant writings for the last several years. so the question before the senate is whether, given ms. kagan's background as a political advisor and academic, we believe she could impartially apply the law to groups with which she doesn't agree and for which she and the obama administration might not empathize. so far, i don't have that confidence. as the hearings progress, we'll k

miss kagan was also the point person for the clinton administration's effort to bl k block -- abortions. perhaps she was the key person who convinced president obama to c who convinced president clinton to change his mind on that precedure.clinton to change his mind on that pcedure. her actions punished the military and defeened our soldiers as they fought in two wars over seas. as someone w feels the burden of sending young men and women into harm's way, to ensure military resucruiters were tread fairly, i can't take this issue lightly. dean kagan also joined with three over law school deans to write a letter in opposition to senator graham's legislation for determining who was an enemy combatant for the war on terror. she most recently, the nominee served as solicitor general for little over a year. but her shortene there has not been without controversy. in her first apellate argument, miss kagan told the court that the first amendment would allow the federal government of banniban banning pam plephlets -- thomaa pain's common sense. to suggest that the government now has the power t

during the clinton administration because of the agreed framework which was done in 1994, north korea produced no additional plutonium. when president clinton came into office north korea has enough plutonium for one or two nuclear weapons which been produced on first president bush's watch. during the eight years of the clinton administration no more plutonium was developed in north korea. i take that as a very positive step. we were in the midst of negotiations to move forward on both long-range missiles and nuclear program. president bush came in, took a very different approach. as a result, north korea produced enough for between eight and 10 more weapons. that said, we are here and we have to do with it. it is a very tough problem. i think that your point thatgaza launching rockets into israel is crucial. the security of israel is constantly at risk. it is why we're moving forward intensely on the peace process. i think it is crucial because there is no interim solution. you really have to get to the end of this terrible problem. we have to get to a two-state solution and ensure

, back then the clinton administration. all that cozyness that president obama talked about, we are seeing it here. and that's understandable and didn't want to be too harsh until the country gave him the close ally. and i appreciate my friend's assistance. but i did want to change gears here and talk a few minutes about something very close to my heart and i know my friend eye heart and he mentioned the word, my lord and you and i believe in the same lord, but the book that we're pointed to discusses israel. our friend and our ally israel. and it continues to grieve me much to see the way this administration continues to snub israel. this episode with flotilla that was an effort to force israel's hand. anything that can be used to blow up more israelis into the gaza strip, they made it very clear, that was very predictable because when you study the course of human history and government's history, you know that when the strongest ally of a small country shows the world that there is space between us and our smaller ally,

kagan was a key player behind the clinton administration's extreme abortion policy. in may 1997, after president clinton had vetoed the partial birth abortion ban act, ms. kagan wrote a memo recommending that he support the substitutes for the ban being offered by senators daschle and feinstein. she recommended that solely for political reasons because it might attract some votes from senators who would otherwise vote to override his veto. had that strategy worked, of course, the substitutes would not have passed and partial-birth abortions birth abortion would have remained legal. the barbaric practice of partial birth abortion would have remained legal. significantly, however, ms. kagan noted that the office of legal counsel had concluded that these substitute amendments were unconstitutional under the supreme court's roe v. wade decision. there is no indication that she disagreed with this conclusion. the point is that ms. kagan urged that purely political position on abortion that was at odds with what the clinton administration then believed the constitution requ

host: you heard the stories about the e-mails when she served in the clinton administration. what have you heard? guest: she was exposed to a huge variety of issues that face the country, that the white house has its fingers on almost anything that goes on, issues on american indian reservations, to the big tobacco lawsuit that was filed then and actually still some action for the supreme court now. tax policy, patents, almost everything that goes on in the country at some level influences the white house, and on the domestic policy staff she had a role in it. we heard that she was quite hard sometimes in her vocabulary. she was very businesslike to her approach to issues, very politically savvy. everything, in fact, that we would have expected. host: where would you see, knowing what you do about elena kagan, where the you see the lines of questioning going? guest: the democrats will ask for to explain how wonderful she is and how all of her preparation to this moment really inevitably lead to her nomination and how she would be extremely concerned with the impact of longer

. >> she was working in the clinton administration. that doesn't mean those are her views. that was like a jeff sessions strategy. >> i take that as a compliment, thanks. >> larry: penn, it's your turn. >> i agree with james. it feels great. i might do that more often. it feels warm and cuddly and comfortable. confirm her. it's the president's choice. he made it. the who cares what i think. who wants to see people read long speeches and grandstand. >> i take it back, larry. after what you said she said in 1995, i would appoint her as president. i'm more for her now than i was before after i realized she said that. the. >> larry: let me get a break. we'll discuss the supreme court decision. today if you live in chicago, despite a 28-year-old law, they threw it out today. you can have a handgun. we'll talk about that after this. [ male announcer ] at toyota, we care about your safety. that's why we're investing one million dollars every hour... to improve our technology and your safety. it's an investment that's helped toyota earn multiple top safety pick awards for 2010 by t

i would also oppose restrictions of this nature on the clinton administration or the bush administration. the irony is that congress seeks to impose its will as exactly the time the obama administration has secured significant diplomatic success. i'm concerned that enacting the legislation cuts our credibility going forward. as long as the global economy runs on oil, iran's massive reserves continue to make them a player. the world will buy their oil and the world will sell them refined oil products. even with additional sanctions, the question is not will it work, but who is profittng and how? it stands likely that the revolutionary guard in countries like china will benefit and not one member of the iran an elite will lack for gasoline while ordinary iranians will go without. this is particularly counterproductive when one notes by all accounts that every day iranians -- everyday iranians still like americans. yet this legislation allows the regime to rally support by blaming the united states for hardships. they will use this as an opportunity to end their current unsustainable subsid

from '95 to '99, she served with the clinton administration first as an associate white house counsel and then in positions with the domestic policy counsel. in 1999, she returned to massachusetts to join the fact of harvard law school. where she would become later dean in charles hamilton houston professor of law. while at harvard, her article "presidential administration" was named the year's top scholar little article by the american bar association section on administrate i be law ann regulatory practice. she was nominatenated on 2009 to be solicitor general. i'm proud our nation's woman deep solicitor general has such deep roots in massachusetts. if confirmed, she would be the first in the history of our court. as solicitor general, she frequently represents the united states before the supreme court and she's argued several high profile cases before the court and was recently victoriorious in the holder versus humanitarian law project case which held that congress's prohibition of material support and resources to foreign terrorist organizations is constitutional. she's undown t

she served in the carter and clinton administrations. elliot cohen, a professor at the johns hopkins school of advanced international studies. he served in the bush administration. and david ignatius, a columnist with the "washington post", who has covered the conflict extensively. let's start with all of you by talking about this eventful day. what was your first reaction, jessica matthews, not only to stanley mcchrystal's firing but also david petraeus' return? >> i thought the president had no choice. he did exactly the right thing and what had to be done. and if there was a way for this to happen with a minimal consequences for the war, he found it in the appointment of petraeus, that this was to make a personnel change without a hint of policy change , this was the only person. and petraeus was willing to do it, and i thought the president hit every note right today. >> ifill: elliot cohen? >> well, as someone who has been very critical of the president, i have to say i agree with jessica, i thought the speech the president gave was

that's 10 years after the 1998-1999 leases, during the clinton administration, had that language pulled out. 10 years later, she comes out from british petroleum and goes to work for the interior department for minerals management. really interesting. 10 years that always rings a bell. oh, yeah, unless it's murder, the statute of limitations is normally a maximum of 10 years. so that's probably good news. if there was anything that went wrong back there that was done that shouldn't have been done, 10 years, just answer the question. you know. why did you pull that language out? before you went to work for british petroleum and helped big oil company make so much money? so anyway, that's a matter of concern, continues to be a matter of concern. i did ask the acting director of m.m.s., since we know that the only entity within minerals management that is allowed to be unionized is the offshore inspectors, i asked, now we know you're dividing m.m.s. up into three groups, three parts. the prior director indicated that she didn't know if they might ought to unionize or not, didn't really kno

president, is -- started in the clinton administration. there was always talk by the republicans, and by everybody, not just the republicans, that should we do more than provide welfare to people? shouldn't we provide a way they can go to work? that's what this money is about. those programs are going to be terminated. programs that have worked so well to have people go from welfare to work. yesterday the republicans said no unanimously. let them stay on welfare. they don't need to learn how to work. they don't need to transfer to a job. this legislation was rejected yesterday, provided -- yesterday provided tax credits for research and development. a lot of companies, especially small companies can't do research and development they need to do unless they get a tax incentive to do it well. it won't be done. this bill provided $5 billion -- all i've talked about paid for, $5 billion in new market tax credits. what this meant is that investments could be made in economically distressed areas. they exist in oregon, they exist in nevada. they

miss kagan was also the point person for the clinton administration's effort to bl k block -- abortions. perhaps she was the key person who convinced president obama to cha who convinced president clinton to change his mind on that precedure.clinton to change his mind on that precedure. her actions punished the military and defeened our soldiers as they fought in two wars over seas. as someone who feels the burden of sending young men and women into harm's way, to ensure military resucruiters were tread fairly, i can't take this issue lightly. dean kagan also joined with three over law school deans to write a letter in opposition to senator graham's legislation for determining who was an enemy combatant for the war on terror. she most recently, the nominee served as solicitor general for little over a year. but her shortenure there has not been without controversy. in her first appellate argument, miss kagan told the court that the first amendment would allow the federal government of banniban banning pam plephlets -- thomas pain's common sense. to suggest that the government now has th

from her work ithe clinton administration, over 170,00 pages of documents, including 80,000 pages of e-mails, which is more than twice the material received in connection with the nominations of chief justice roberts and justice alito. in fact, we even have this nominee's senior thesis, her graduate thesis, nearly 70 articles she aught foertd daily princetonian's as a college student, 200 speeches and another 200 interviews. the only thing, as far as i can tell, that we don't have is her kindergarten report card. but i respectfully submit to my colleagues that if they can't thoroughly evaluate general kagan on the record we have, there is no record nor nominee who could satisfy them. so we already have a clear idea of a record and what this hearing will be like, which brings know my second point, which is why this hearing is so crucially important. we need a justice who can create moderate majorities on this immoderate supreme court. i'm going to be blunt about this. we have a highly fractured court with an often rarified way of approaching the law. the rightward shift of the court u

saying that almost a different standard because back a number of years ago, you worked for the clinton administration. would you agree with chief justice roberts as a lawyer of the administration the policies you worked in advance the views of the president's policy of whom you worked. >> i worked for president bill clinton. we tried to implement his policy views and objectives. >> let me ask you this -- we've heard you talk about harvard law school and military recruiting when you were a dean. and by enforcing the long standing nondiscrimination policy. -- you provided military recruiters with the access to students had been successfully used for years under your predecessor dean clark for the approval of military recruiters and the department of defense. did you ever barre kreuters from the u.s. military from access of harvard law school when you were dean. >> senator leahy, military recruiters had access to harvard students every single day i was dean. >> let me ask you this, did the -- did the -- while you were there, did -- did the number of students recruited go down? at all? while you were --

host: you heard the stories about the e-mails when she served in the clinton administration.what have you heard? guest: she was exposed to a huge variety of issues that face the country, that the white house has its fingers on almost anything that goes on, issues on american indian reservations, to the big tobacco lawsuit that was filed then and actually still some action for the supreme court now. tax policy, patents, almost everything that goes on in the country at some level influences the white house, and on the domestic policy staff she had a role in it. we heard that she was quite hard sometimes in her vocabulary. she was very businesslike to her approach to issues, very politically savvy. everything, in fact, that we would have expected. host: where would you see, knowing what you do about elena kagan, where the you see the lines of questioning going? guest: the democrats will ask for to explain how wonderful she is and how all of her preparation to this moment really inevitably lead to her nomination and how she would be extremely concerned with the impact of longer o

you have tricare for life which was passed in the waning days of the clinton administration. when you urn 65 you can stay in it. when this commission is done, they will be means testing a lot of the other benefits. those are all things you can do that save substtial amounts of money and in keeping with things the secretary of defense and the esident have said in the national security strategy. thank you. >> i think we are lucky to have a very smart crowd here. we will make our presentations brief so that you can hammer us with questions and we hope that you do. my persptive is this. cuing the defense budget, soon insignificantly, is a national security imperative. patras' purcell's,hat is the one thinghat we could have done these past eight years, the one thing could have done that we did not to do that would have made the greatest contribution to our nation cost+ security and to the security of the world, i believe the answer isimple. get our financial house in order. that is the one thing we could down but would have made the greatest contribution. instability in the world

president, is -- started in the clinton administration. there was always talk by the republicans, and by everybody, not just the republicans, that should we do more than provide welfare to people? shouldn't we provide a way they can go to work? that's what this money is about. those programs are going to be terminated. programs tt have worked so well to have people go from welfare to work. yesterday the republicans said no unanimously. let them stay on welfare. they don't need to learn how to work. they don't need to transfer to a job. this legislation was rejected yestday, provided yesterday provided tax credits for research and development. a lot of companies, especially small companies can't do research and development they need to do unless they get a tax incentive to do it well. it won't be done. this bill provided $5 billion -- all i've talked about paid for, $5 billion in new mart tax credits. what this meant is that investments could be made in economically distressed areas. they exist in oregon, they exist in nevada. they're going

when i was in iran under the clinton administration, people were meeting iranians here in washington. some of them were academics. some were people involved in the reform movement. i was sitting in iran. at that time, it was common knowledge in iran that this additional was happening. no one took it seriously. the people who were coming to washington to meet the clinton administration had no influence whatsoever on the government. i think that part of the problem hhs been that at different times when the united states could have taken advantage of invasion moderate conservatives ttey were focused on the reform movement. they thought those people had power. now, we have reached a point, unfortunately, where there really cannot be engagement. i think there have been key moments of missed opportunities because the wronpeople were engaged. >> the question has been asked of the other panel and i would like your thoughts on it -- should the united states government intervene in a run at all? if the united states does so, the think it would hurt the movement inside iran or not? >> i touched

the story of the veteran's health administration underscores this point. when president clinton took office, the v h a provided substandard, and some would say woeful care to our veterans. the administration quickly put in place reforms and adapted open source software to manage patient records. today, the veteran's health system is widely viewed as a model of efficiency and effectiveness, delivering superior care at a lower cost. no new legislation was adopted, it just betterment -- just better management practices. the health and human services administration and other federal agencies are just starting the long and difficult process of implementing health care reform. we must give as much attention to this process as we did to passing the legislation. the same, of course, is also true of other important legislation, from the reform of financial legislation to energy and climate legislation, to infrastructure investments. if we are to reach our goals, we must give priority to improving government management and operations. we must be ready to execute. the center for american p

host: during the clinton administration, he served a couple of years as the assistant secretary for environmental safety and health. he was also the chair of george washington university's school of public health and health services department of environmental and occupational health. that was a mouthful. let's take our next call. danny, on the democrats' line. caller: good morning. i think the answer, if we have every skimming at and the -- skining about -- skimming device rally to our help, i think this is the only solution. we absolutely have to suck all of this opera. -- sa, all of this up. i do not know if it is too expensive. it is too expensive and not to do it. i have been watching this discussion. like many of the discussions we have, i see all of these people that call in that it right when it knows, and they are hateful, and they do not want to help. i understand their leaders, it is not in their dna to help the common man. i cannot, for the life of me, understand why every day citizens will buy into this when they are being hurt, and see hard-working people in louisiana being victimiz

that price adjustment language being pulled off of offshore leases in 1998, 1999, left the clinton administration when they went out so we couldn't really talk to them, investigate. turns out she works now with the department of interior with the minerals management. go figure. look, there is a mess going on. there's a lot of things we can do to quit killing jobs. if that 700,000 jobs were being lost when the democrats had this majority and compassion does not equal giving away money. we got to stop it. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentlemannfrom colorado. mr. perlmutter: mr. speaker, how much time does each side have? the speaker pro tempore: the %% gentleman from colorado has 19 minutes. the gentlelady from north carolina has 8 1/2. mr. perlmutter: i'd ask my friend from north carolina how many more speakers she may have. ms. foxx: we have at least two more speakers, mr. speaker. mr. perlmutter: i just would say, again, reading from the letter from the independent community bankers of america, read the first sentence. the act, the small business lending fund ac

miss kagan was also the point person for the clinton administration's effort to bl k block -- abortionsperhaps she was the key person who convinced president obama to cha who convinced president clinton to change his mind on that precedure.clinton to change his mind on that precedure. her actions punished the military and defeened our soldiers as they fought in two wars over seas. as someone who feels the burden of sending young men and women into harm's way, to ensure military resucruiters were tread fairly, i can't take this issue lightly. dean kagan also joined with three over law school deans to write a letter in opposition to senator graham's legislation for determining who was an enemy combatant for the war on terror. she most recently, the nominee served as solicitor general for little over a year. but her shortenure there has not been without controversy. in her first appellate argument, miss kagan told the court that the first amendment would allow the federal government of banniban banning pam plephlets -- thomas pain's common sense. to suggest that the government now has the

guest: in my earlier answer, i said that was one thing that the clinton administration did that was theng thing to do. apparently the gentleman did not hhar that answer. host: next call, democratic line. caller: there is a fundamental issue thatti think a very large part of the american people do not understand. our country is run on a capitalist system, which means the government, the corporations, it is just basic economics. there is a lack of education. people do noo understand that money is king in it is, it will be, until we change some of our laws, some of the way that the government interacts with the company's. president obama is a very intelligent person who understands the bigger picture, and unfortunately we have many people in this country who only can see past next week and that is about it. host: given what the viewer just said, can i ask you, what is the first law you would change to address her concerns about money and corporations and politics? guest: universal health care. i fought hard for universal health care. i believe that affects every american. i believe that wo

wall street led the effort in 1999 and i might say aided and abetted by the clinton administration.. i am proud of the fact i am one of 82 voted against it. what these whiz kids in wall street did is they put this together. deposit banks and investment houses. and it is this stew that made a sick. to my way of thinking, some say you cannot put the genie back in the bottle. i happen to believe you can. i happen to be in a small minority who believes if you want to straighten out the system we have to go back to glass stiegel and separate account depository banking and insurance and make things more transparent in the derivatives market as it pertains to the investment houses. i know that is a minority view. i still think that is the only way you will solve this. as part of this -- far as this bill goes, i want to compliment senattr lincoln for a statement and her -- her statement and her leadership. they have to be transparent and they have got to be tightly controlled. glass steigel worked for all these years. i would close by saying i defy anyone here on this committee, to anyone on

led the effort in 1999 to do away with glass- steagall and it was aided and abetted by the clinton administration. i was one of a two voted against it in the united states senate. then they put this to together -- this stew together. it has made as sick. to my way of thinking, some people say that you cannot put the genie back in the bottle big i am sorry. i happen to believe that you can carry -- back in the bottle. i am sorry. i happen to believe that you can. you have to put up those walls. then makes things a little bit more transparent as it pertains to the investment houses. but i know that that is a minority view. but i still think that is the only way you're going to solve this. as far as this bill goes, i want to compliment senator lincoln for her statement and her leadership on this issue, on the issue of derivatives. they have to be transparent and they have to be complete control. glassssteagall work for all of those years. we have to get as close to that as we can. i defy anyone here on this conference committee, anyone sitting in this room, i defy anyone in wall street or new york t

was the government of wasa -- who's major client the government of china during the first clinton administration. host: thank you. are we headed toward a double- dip recession? caller: unless they removed barriers to employment. the government feels they can impose prevailing wages -- you can't get any city of pittsburgh government contract unless you pay prevailing wage. what makes a politician think he can set wage rates when it should be a free market? if i am in millionaire and i look at the environment and the rules to hiring people, if there are too many barriers, i will take my money where there are less barriers. they should drop the quotas, prevailing wage. unions, what did they have as a bargaining chip? 500 people decide they don't want to work for me? i will find somebody else. what do they have other than an intimidation? they need to remove the barriers and quotas. and i wish one state would at least experiment with this. put a moratorium on all barriers to wages and you will see an explosion of hiring. ok, bye. host: this is "the washington post" with the headline, push to extend

paulson, we've got to give $400 billion to fannie and freddie because in 1999, under the clinton administration, you said let's loan to people with poor credit, loan to people without much of a down payment and republicans and democrats both rush to use this into a source of cheap money and it failed. and republicans said, and still say, and say as this bill is on the floor, wait a minute. you're going to reform these companies before you pour taxpayer dollars in them. and every republican in the house voted no, we will not give them taxpayer money until they're reformed and there's a plan to liquidate them. the chairman says we need to liquidate them. what about fannie and freddie? why aren't we liquidating them? and we're not. the biggest bailout we've had is of fannie and freddie who did we bail out? did we bail out the banks that had shares? no we bailed out the chinese bondholders and sec are retear paulsen said, the chinese may not lend us money. we'll sure need the chinese to lend us money if this bill passes because there's a derivatives section in here, now, we have a letter that mr. p

you helped spark this under the clinton administration and with experts continue to show leadership inhe field. indeed, the csis report serves as a key thread of continuity across to administration's and really set the foundation for crafting this administration's strategy for cyber and security. thank you as well for the opportunity to speak here today. this is my first public engagements since i've been promoted, assuming the commander of u.s. cyber command. i am pleased to be with all of you here today and can't think of no better place to talk about cyberspace and u.s. cyber com than at csis. before i talk about that and focus on the defense department, let me say up front that cyber security is a team sport. i see a lot of the team out here in the audience. we cannot do this alone. within the government, howard schmidt has the lead for coordinating departments and agencies and our approach to cyber security. he has done a superb job and has been great to work with. for the team that dhs, we have had great partners want a set of very complex issues. all of us in government recogniz

i would have liked to have seen the current -- the clinton -- former clinton administration people do this as well and how t#/policy is actually made. they are at the roosevelt room table making policy and we would one easy place to find out what they have to say about these issues. host:çvjo do you think of the oa administration is reading your views? guest: i don't know. >host: how often do you contribute? guest: irregularly. host:tÑ" we will take your phoe calls. stanley, from south carolina, good morning. caller: i have been listening into the conversation. i believe that the president -- we have to spend money to get folks back to work. we have to/+mxñ stimulate the economy. 2áwki believe that we will brig down the deficit when folks get back to work by them spending money,au0-v bringing taxes intoe economy. that is how i think the deficit -- how we will decrease the deficit. of view?ur response to his poine guest: on the need to spend to be able tooffill this call -- i have never been big on deficit and spending. there are natural need from time to time to have deficits. an

you helped spark the discussion in the 1990's under the clinton administration and with experts like jim lewis, csis continues to show leadership. securing cyber space for the 44th presidency served as a key thread for continuity across two administrations and really set the foundation for crafting this administration's strategy for cyber and security. thank you as well for the opportunity to speak her today. this is my first public engagement since have i been promoted and assuming the command of u.s. cyber command. i'm pleased to be here with all of you today and can think of no better place to talk about cyber space and u.s. cyber com than here at csis. but before i talk about u.s. cyber com and focus on the defense department, let me state up front that cyber security is a team sport. i see a lot of the team out here in the audience. we can't do this alone. within the government, howard schmidt has the lead for coordinating the departments an3 cybersecurity. he has done a superb job and has been great to work with. for the team at d.h.s., phil ridinger, admiral mike brown and oth

what role did the clinton administration and bush followed it up also, but what role did they play in this whole mess that we're in now? i mean u, wasn't government involvement the reason why they loaned money to these people. how much has that played the down fall we've experienced? guest: it did play an important role. you're right. democrat and republican administrations did encourage banks to lend to groups of people who perhaps couldn't afford it that way. and congress pushed for it as well. there were several pieces of legislation passed and again, both sides of the aisle were encouraging the mortgage lending. home ownership to expand to more of america. it looks good. when you know, in theory that the wonderful thing. more americans should own homes but as you said, it's riskier when people who incomes don't allow them to do that, if you lent to them, eventually it's going bad. for some years when the economy wasn't doing well and asset prices were rising. officially housing prices were rising that was okay because even if you have income that doesn't make you help you with the

warren christopher in the clinton administration took five trips in the first 16 months. hill record with two trips to israel, they write in the fed page hill of the clinton led a toward travel pace with the exception of one place, israel could make the fewest trips and spent the least amount of time as any secretary of state in more than three decades. georgia, russia -- russell is a republican caller about helen thomas and whether she should resign from the white house press corps. go ahead, russell. good morning. we will go to somerville, georgia, and this is brad on our independent line. caller: to cut to the chase, the whole hot-button issue of israel is a religious argument. i would like to see a debate on c-span, a discussion of the issue. you see the right wing conservative portion of our political government -- but it is the religious right. despite what you believe or -- in the end, only one regulator and that is jesus christ, the only one really knows. host: fairfax, virginia, joshua on the democratic line. caller: now, i don't think helen thomas should resign.

what role did the clinton administration and bush followed it up also, but what role did they play in whole mess that we're in now? i mean u, wasn't government involvement the reason why they loaned money to these people. how much has that played the down fall we've experienced? guest: it did play an important role. you're right. democrat and republican administrations did encourage banks to lend to groups of people who perhaps couldn't afford it that way. and congress pushed for it as well. there were several pieces of legislation passed and again, both sides of the aisle were encouraging the mortgage lending. home ownership to expand to more of america. it looks good. when you know, in theory that the wonderful thing. more americans should own homes but as you said, it's riskier when people who incomes don't allow them to do that, if you lent to them, eventually it's going bad. for some years when the economy wasn't doing well and asset prices were rising. officially housing prices were rising that was okay because even if you have income that doesn't make you help you with the paym

psychiatry clinton, administrator shaw, a lot of folks in the government are taing about partnershipse machinery to do that, and i think that we need to -- i now that we have had some good conversations with folks at usaid recognizing there is a lack of transparency. what are we actually going to do about it? i would argue a similar site is needed at usaid similar to the recovery.gov or what has been planned through the undp and haitian government and haiti could be a pilot project. we should be able to track if we are giving money to education we should be able to track it down to the floor not just to see the building but to actually see the school was functioning with their teachers and students are attending schools. accountability as i mentioned is critical that we invest in that sort of accountability mechanism. there are some positive development. the interim commission i think they have their first informal meeting yesterday. the inform meeting will happen on june 14th and that is basically a body that is to set policies for and coordinate the aid. a friend of mine from the in

we find out a lady who was in the clinton administration that actually signed the notice about the deepwater offshore leases back in 1999 and 1998 that pulled the price adjustment language which apparently has cost our country billions of dollars from its treasury where they should have gone to big companies like british petroleum, turned out that lady went to work for british petroleum from 2001 until 2009 and then june, 2009, she came back to work for minerals management service. and even though we heard from the deputy secretary of interior, well, we've recused her from areas where she may have a conflict. give me a break. no wonder someone thought that the white house had their back they could go cheaply and cut corners and make extra profit because they were in with the powers that be in the washington. they were in. they were in favor of the crap and trade bill. they supported tarp. they supported the stimulus. and this sthration loved having a big oil company that supported them on this stuff so they could tout that. b.p. thought they had their back covered and it was only when after

she had experience in the clinton administration doing policy work at most of her life has been spent in academia. that is a very political environment. deans were the great scholars of the academic world but in today's world, they are more fund-raisers. thissis a concern to think about her judicial philosophy and how she will be able to switch from a mode of policy- making to a position of a judge where you need to look a lot first. you will need to come to a fair result instead of thinking what you would vote for if you were a politician. host: there are hundreds of e- mails dating back when she was part of the administration. what is in those e-mails and can they tell you something about her judicial philosophy? guest: there is every little about her judicial philosophy. she has been studious to avoid taking a position on legal issues. she was placed as a solid and committed liberal which is no surprise. president obama wants to appoint a liberal wing -- particularly when he is pushing so much legislation through. he wants someone to support the legislation. there will be the healt

president who benefited me to date was bill clinten because my husband was rehired under bill clinton's administrationguest: i think you make an excellent point. there is something to say for optics. but at the end of the day, results matter. and i think of harry truman as a great example. when he left office, he had polling results of 22%. but the long-term benefits of his policies lingrd and i think that presidents can get too absorbed with the optics. that was a common complaint about clinton, by the way, so how do you balance, as a voter, whether someone is making you feel they're successful or if they're actually successful? the caller suggests that it's your own personal economic situation that you should use to judge a presidency. but again, that isn't all that fair. it isn't obama's fault that someone loses a job tomorrow. is it? but that family may believe that it was the obama years in which my family experienced terrible turmoil. host: looking at the idea of being transformational president. president obama's dream of being a trons formational figure may be slipping from his grasp. and he t

during the clinton administration, i think there were four other times they moved members of the national guard to the border. several times during the bush administration. obviously, what president calderon has done to fight crime and gangs is something that has caused increased violence. >> robert, is there a federal report on the flotilla incident for timing purposes? in who is doing that? >> it is the israeli government's. >> the israelis? >> that is my understanding. >> [unintelligible] what about an independent investigation? >> that could include international investigation. i would point youtube -- >> do you know anything about a report like that, the timing? are we talking all week or -- >> i said earlier -- [laughter] if anything changes, we will let you know. >> how did the meeting with gov. brewer, about? -- come about? >> i think she requested the meeting. i do not know when. i saw an e-mail several days ago. >> why did the president decide >> look, you are not going to deal with the immigration issue without dealing with what is happening along the border. certainly, at ariz

host: wendy sherman served as the state department counselor, served under the clinton administrationorea appeared let's begin -- north korea. begin with theanctns by south korea. will it work? guest: my guess is it ll make everybody take a step and haws. we will certainly not go forward the six-party talks at this point. everyone is very concerned about we knowear weapons at korea undoubtably has. think what we need a solidarity. that theo make sure forward council moves with a condemnation of what done with a loss of 46 foul lives on the freighter, a naval ship in south korea, which was sunky the koreans. investigational y the south koreans is pretty definitive. the russians are n in seoul loing at that material, tha investigation, to be able to hope, in the, i criticatore very process, also looking at the investigation to make their own judgments. host: will they joined the investigation? board?y on guest: i think ultimately china on board. be theddr like to country out. once russia comes on board it be more difficult for chinese. wen jiabao, the seroul and said ot protect a countr

led the effort in 1999 to do away with glass- steagall and it was aided and abetted by the clinton administration. i was one oa two voted against it in the united states senat then they put this to togethe -- this stew together. it has made as sick. toy way of thinking, some people say that you cannot t the geniback in the bottle big i am sorry. i happen to believe that you c carry -- back in the bottle. i amorry. i happen to believe that you can. you have to put up those walls. then makes tngs a little bit more transparent as it pertains to the investment houses. but i know that that is a minority view. but i still think that is the only way you're going to solve this. as far as this bill goes, i want to compliment senator lincoln for her statement and her adership on this issue, on the issue oferivatives. they have to be transparent and they have to be complete control. glassssteagall work for all of those years. we have to get as close to that as we can. i defy anyone here on this conference committee, anyone sitting in this room, i defy anyone in wall street or new york to show mone person, o

what could be so dammed for the clinton administration to do this? please answer. . . nswe guest: i wish i uld enr. am not awe ything in e puic recd your fi point, abo troo in thtellence ommunity, i age withou. i served invarious embassies arou with the military, particularly the army. the qualifications of our armed forces today is nothing short of spectacular. i aggee with you on that, absent thee. i agree with yyu on the quality of our intelligent and our intelligence capabilittes. all oo the different forms of intelligence, we have a positively dedicated and brilliant work force. host: what kind of academic background makes a good intelligence officer? guest: language and area expertise, knowing things about different countries a few are studyyng geopolitics. various types of technical intelligence are important if you are doing nuclear non- proliferation briefer something like that. you need to have technical competence to be able to make judgments. host: 10 more minutes. president obama in the last week or so nominated james clapper to be the new director of inte

you have tricare for life which was passed in the waning days of the clinton administration.n you urn 65 you can stay in it. when this commission is done, they will be means testing a lot of the other benefits. those are all things you can do that save substantial amounts of money and in keeping with things the secretary of defense and the president have said in the national security strategy. thank you. >> i think we are lucky to have a very smart crowd here. we will make our presentations brief so that you can hammer us with questions and we hope that you do. my perspective is this. cutting the defense budget, soon insignificantly, is a national security imperative. patras' purcell's, what is the one thing that we could have done these past eight years, the one thing we could have done that we did not to do that would have made the greatest contribution to our nation cost+ security and to the security of the world, i believe the answer is simple. get our financial house in order. that is the one thing we could down but would have made the greatest contribution. instability

in addition on a personal basis, i had the privilege of serving in the clinton administration and office of secretary of defense and looked at these issues to governmental questions broadly and use of contractors and contingency environments more specifically to some extent. so i have that perspective as well to offer. let me start by suggesting two things. first, i think it's important we dispense with simplistic labels. the term private security itself encompasses an array of capabilities and functions from facility protection, training personal protection and more. we ought to be careful not to treat all asuspects of private security as being one. moreover while the public's perception is inaccurately formed, when looked at objectively and in light of the size of the mission and hundreds of thousands of private security personnel who have cycled through the theater of conflict, overall their performance has been highly professional and disciplined and sometimes even heroic. this is not to whitewash any incidents to occurred, to minimize the importance of the issue or to suggest their

-- a big part of the reason under the budget that was passed by president clinton, we adopted under a democratic administration, demooratic leadership, a pay-as-you-go that said that we aren't going to spind more than we take in. just like people have to do in their own household. when we came back into the majority, we re-adopted those rules. and what we need to make sure we continue to do, except for emergency spending, which in an economy which is as dire as this one, we have had a number of different emergency situations, but we have to make sure that we pay for the llgislation that we are passing, whether it's including the war costs in the budget and actually having it be real numbers instead of pretending that we don't have an ongoing obligation when it comes to war funding. we included the cost of the iraq war in the budget, unlike the republicans who pretenn year to year that we weren't go to go have that expense. . we have been trying to be responsible, trying to get things back on track. %% we can establish some parameters we can be -- governments, unfortunately, are are -- our colleagues on the oth