around the panel do. 15 years ago, i think that was right on. i think -- he had ticked off he have been in his entire organization that he had had started. he had such an abrasive personality i think caused by certain events in his life, most especially the fact that he was tortured so horribly. and betrayed his best friend. right? to death. so i think there was a lot of pent-up anger that kept him from working well -- you know, playing well with the other children. but on the other hand, he has had 15, 20, you know -- nearly 20 to watch how bin laden did things, to learn from him, to see how the organization works. and i'm sure he has a deputy, as well, who will take over for him if he is killed. because the organization is this tightly knit hierarchical organization with lots of room for guys getting killed off and replacing them. not that that doesn't cause them problems. i'm certain it does. but a lot of people expected the entire al qaeda core to collapse. and the whole worldwide thing to collapse after the death of bin laden. and that didn

i have a slightly different read on him than perhaps others on the panel do. 15 years ago i think that right on. i think he had ticked off everybody in his entire organization that he had started. he had such an abrasive personality i think caused by certain events in his life, most especially the fact that he was tortured so horribly and betrayed his best friend, right, to death. so i think there was a lot of pent- pent-up anger that kept him from playing well with other children. he's had 15, 20 -- to watch how bin laden worked. the organize is this tightly knit hierarchical. there were 40 days silence and then he was announced as the next head and things just went on. i said i don't thing he'll be able to give up attacking the united states, even though his focus seems to be egypt and exploiting the arab springs in particular from everything he's saying but he is also extremely angry at the united states. and i think his attack on the u.s. won't be about chasing the u.s. out of the -- you know, our lands, it won't be about fund-raising per se. in fact, i don't think it will have a r

i would ask that you try and keep your comments and questions brief, and try and show the panel do likewise in replying. can we take them in batches of three, please, and also identify yourself and your affiliation. the man in the front here, and the then -- a couple more. >> specifically, about the missile defense across europe there. i was in a navy. ron fisher, we the people now dot org. the last submarine, i could have wiped out over 100 bases or cities with warheads. the apm is against the -- i'd like to know, to we really want to build that system? because i guess the international treaty, it is also ineffective. do we want to build an abm? >> in the center here. >> thanks. andrea bauman, center of for transatlantic relations. my question is about something that some of the panelists have touched upon, but i would like to specifically ask you with regard to your expectations for the chicago summit whether the discussion about specialization and coordination will be accompanied by a debate over a vision of what nato actually wants to do with a smart defense force, in terms of, in the s

let me just say this before they answer the question and i'm certainly going to let the panel do it. i would say the congressional black caucus does not yield to political correctness. our problem is when we look around, nobody standing behind us. that's our problem. any time we say something somebody doesn't like, then you all want to be upset with us. what we're trying to do is tell the truth. we represent most of the black people in this country. but how many of you all stick with us? now that's the truth is what it is. now this summer we're going to be taking a tour around this country talking about how we get people registered to vote. we're going to be taking buses. i want to see how many of you all are on the bus. i'm going to look for you. if you're not on the bus, i'm going to call you and i'm going to call you out. anybody want to answer that question. >> just really quickly. i think that -- the short answer is, yes. the medium answer is that we need to employ a little bit of political sophistication because it doesn't mean we have to be such antagonists all the time that w

doing here. she said this is may 3 is and this lapses june 1. she said my name is angie davis. she said would you please ask the panel to do good work. we can't be without flood insurance. >> we know that every two houses sold generate one job. even in the worst of times we're generating about 2 plus million jobs a year when the housing market is on track. without national flood insurance, we affect so many homes, not just coastal states but interior states today. and even those that have existing homes, not potential homeowners, not folks that are looking to either go out and sell their home and by them -- if there's lapse in insurance, the loan is at risk of being called. this is a fledgling real estate market, as important as any other as elt, at important is from an economic and social and cultural standpoint. when up do anything, anything to affect that fledgling real estate recovery, you are literally affecting the economic recovery and social and kalt rahal aspects. i can't tell you how important this piece of legislation and how important your efforts are are to get it extended for the fire years. >> just a real quick follow-

i would like to mention now that we do have a very distinguished panel, you do have basically the cv. i'm not going to read it this time except to indicate that each and every one specialized in this particular area and because of the time factor and some have to leave earlier, i would like to invite first mark levitt, matthew levitt who is as you know the director of the terrorism program at the washingtonian institute on middle east policy. >> good afternoon, thank you. and thanks also for accommodating my teaching schedule. the students aren't very understanding when you arrive as late as maybe i did here this afternoon. it's a pleasure to be here. thank you very much. if you read the papers this weekend, you might come to the cob collusion that we're done. that al qaeda's all but over and we're on the right trajectory. i might agree with the second half. we're on the right trajectory. but we're not yet where we need to be. we will be i believe at some point in the not too distant future where people won't be talking about al qaeda as such. maybe the al qaeda core as such. but the

do. this would conclude the first panel. i do want to thank our two colleague for the a lively discussion. i appreciate you very much for being here. now we will have the second panel be seated. >>> i would like to introduce the witnesses on our second panel. dr. jeffrey harr ner -- dr. peter kline. without objection, your written statements will be made part of the record. you will now be recognized for five minutes. summary of all your testimony and we'll begin. >> chairman paul, ranking member clay. >> put your mic up close. is it on? >> and distinguished members of the committee. it is an honor to appear before you. left of the market the production of all goods including money passes the profit and loss test of socially beneficial production. like all private enterprises a gold mining company produces if the revenue exceeds the cost of buying its inputs. it's production the beneficial because the outputs exceeds the values of those inputs in producing other goods to satisfy other customers in. the market money production

do have to work on waste. waste levels are high and fraud is only piece of it. we have plenty of money. death panelsnonsense. there never were such things tp. it quelled a very important discussion about what to do in late stages and communities around the end ever life care. i'm sad that that has taken over. with respect to british national health service. it functions well in britain and has many problems. that's why i worked there. i don't believe it will function in the u.s. every country has its own way of care. nice in britain uses science in healthcare. some good features and some trouble sum ones. in the u.s. and all countries we should conduct science to care. when i see a child in my office, i want to make sure i'm putting the best possible knowledge to that child's case. i want science and technology to tell me the best way it care for this kid at this time, and they often do. >> how worried are you that the health care law will be ruled unconstitutional in and what impact -- what are the negative impacts or maybe even positive impact that could happen given what you have seen from your v

do. our second panel looks at abuse of power, abuse of power and how it happens and why it happens and most importantly what we can do and need to do to prevent it. whether it's a prosecutor or a judge or a defender render ineffective assistance to counsel or a police officer violating constitutional rights. this is not something we can tolerate, yet it happens each and every day. and our panel is going to delve deep into the issues that we're seeing not only here in the bay area but throughout the country and throughout the world. our third panel after lunch will talk about the future of the death penalty and hopefully its demise. you might be surprised that we are having a conversation here in san francisco about the death penalty. as you know, our district attorney has indicated that he may seek the death penalty in appropriate cases in san francisco, and that has not been the case for the past decade. but he's coming today to talk about his views. we also have a former warden at san quentin who surprised the last three executions, and she is now the head of death penalty focus which is

we certainly have the panel to do that. so, let's start with -- because i like a little context -- after we leave eisenhower and now it is john f. kennedy's time, what was happening in the country in terms of the naacp, in terms of what lawyers were doing, kenneth mack, and where the black community was and civil rights? little rock nine was considered a source. kenneth mack, i'll start with you. >> okay. what was going on with the country. several things. first the brown decision had been decided. it has been unevenly enforced. the little rock crisis. really nobody knew whether or when or how school desegregation would happen in the south. the justice department was trying to force existing civil rights laws, but there were holes in the existing civil rights laws. it was mentioned earlier that under eisenhower's watch, the civil rights act was enacted. it gave the justice department additional powers to enforce civil rights. still very, very significant con strands on what the justice department can do. the naacp is caught

let me ask my final question to the entire panel. what do you envision as the end goal -- the end goal for language capacity? and what resources or authorities are needed to reach that goal? i would like to discuss the department's vision for national language capacity, and i would like the other witnesses to discuss language capacity within your departments. so that's my question to the entire panel. it may begin. >> thank you. senator. well, ultimately we are really trying to prepare the nation for this the global 21st century society we are going into. and that requires as we've outlined in our international strategy the development of global competencies in our s citizen citizenry. this will lead to positive outcomes all around. in addition to the very focused national security concerns, there is improved understanding of the world, greater effectiveness in our business dealings with other countries and other regions of the world. also, greater understanding of the diversity within our own country as we draw from populations across the w

. >> thank you, panel. do check out panel plus where we pick up with the discussion on our website at www.foxnewssunday.com and follow us on twitter. news sunday. we he want to remind and we want to remind you of my wife's new cookbook with her recipe for butterfly grilled chicken, perfect for a holiday weekend. miss. ♪ ♪ i can do anything ♪ i can do anything today ♪ i cano anywhere ♪ i can go anywhere today ♪ la la lla la la la [ male announcer ] dow solutions help millions of people by helping to make gluten free bread that doesn't taste gluten free. together, the elements of science and the human element can solve anything solutionism. the new optimis ll on those gardening gloves. and the human element can solve anything and let's see how colorful an afternoon can be. with the home depot certified advice to help us expand our palette... ...and prices that keep our budgets firmly rooted... ...we can mix the right soil with the right ideas. ...and bring even more color to any garden. more saving. more doing.

.] >> we continue with our great, great american panel. dom if i say that president obama is the first gay president? >> doive a problem with it? >> yeah. >> i think it's disgraceful. i know you are not homophobic. >> i'm not saying it. it's news week. >> but you said it. you said do i have a problem. >> but that's my point. if i said it, what would happen? >> you would be denounced as a homophone and you would be asked to get off the air. >> there was a fool, a freshman congressman, a republican from oklahoma oklahoma came out and said that gays should be fired from the workplace, there should be no protection. >> let's stay focused here. that's what news week came out with. but interesting we learned a lot since then from the new york times of all places. cal, this was interesting to me, the white house makes this announcement within hours. they are on the phone with black pastors all around the country. they are afraid that they are going to have a loss of votes. and there are even some african-american pastors who have come out and said t

process by these two presidents to advance actual civil rights legislation and we certainly have the panel to do that. let's start with. after we leave eisenhower and it's john f. kennedy's time, what was happening in the country in terms of the naacp, in terms of what lawyers were doing. in terms of the restlessness of the black community about where civil rights was. the little rock niep that was considered a victory of sorts. but yet we were so far from legislation. >> really nobody knew whether and when or how school desegregation would really happen in the south. under president eisenhower's watch the 1957 civil rights act was enacted. the 1960 civil rights act. that gave the justice department additional powers to enforce civil rights, but really still very -- very significant constraints on what the justice department can do. the naacp is caught up with the struggle of trying to implement brown versus the board of education and then there was martin luther king who was catapulted to prominence with the montgomery busboy cot. king is also looking in 1960, 1961 for ways to push the movement

we certainly have the panel to do that. so, let's start with -- because i like a little context -- after we leave eisenhower and now it is john f. kennedy's time, what was happening in the country in terms of the naacp, in terms of what lawyers were doing, kenneth mack, in terms of the restlessness of the black community about where civil rights was, because the little rock nine, that was considered a victory of sorts, but yet we were so far from legislation. so kenneth mack, i think i'll start with you. >> okay. >> all right. >> what was the context for us. >> what was going on in the country? several things. first the brown decision had been decided. it has been unevenly enforced. there had been the little rock crisis, but really nobody knew whether and when or how school desegregation would really happen in the south. the justice department was trying to force existing civil rights laws, but there were holes in the existing civil rights laws. it was mentioned earlier that under president eisenhower's watch the 1967 civil

this will conclude the first panel. i do want to thank our two colleagues for a lively discussion and appreciate you very much for being here. now, we will have the second panel be seated. >>> we'd like to introduce the witnesses on our second panel. dr. jeffrey herbenger. the chairman of the department of economics at grove city college, dr. peter klein is a associate professor of social sciences and director of the mcquinn center for research at the university of missouri. dr. john taylor is the marion robert raymond professor of academics at stanford university and george p. schultz, senior fellow in economics at the hoofhoof -- hoover institute. dr. james galbraith is the lloyd and benson junior chair of government business relations and professor of government at the lyndon b. johnson school of public affairs at the university of texas at austin. dr. alice rivlin is a senior fellow in economic studies at the brookings institution and former vice chair of the federal reserve board of governors. without objection, your wr

. >> i want to hear what the panel thinks. do you think they got everything in that they needed to hear? >> i think it's a clever idea, it might work. but there's a difference between a clever idea and a viable business. i'm wondering where the $30 million, the 1%, how many people did you get to with the tv ads, those kind of questions. >> the statistics came from the appa, the american pet products association. >> that number makes sense. >> the question is, how many people are you going to be able to contact with the tv ads that you're buying? it doesn't matter how many people there are if you can't get to them? >> we're doing all the social media markets, everything, as well as tv, twitter, facebook, we have our people working on that. we expect to hit a big market. >> let's get to scott, do you think they got everything in there that they needed? >> it's an interesting product there is definitely pet enthusiast market out there. the valuation seems off to me. i think this is something that seems as if it's -- prove it first,

panels in action. carl, how are you? >> very well. nice to meet you. >> how do you like the weather? >> not too bad. >> kind of sunny. how does that impact our solar panels when we have lots of sun versus fog which we are typically accustomed to in san francisco? >> well, contrary to popular belief, solar panels will produce electricity when it's foggy out. how much depends on the density of the fog. on a day like today it's hazy for typical san francisco weather. on a day like talking, you can expect 80% of your what would be your full production on a clear sunny day. >> so if i were thinking about getting solar panels and i lived in san francisco and i was worried about haze versus full sun and how that will impact what jets yated, are there any tools or tricks that i can use to determine what the production is going to be like? >> the first thing you need to do is look at what available area do you have. typically most residential systems gone on rooftops. in urban areas like this, we don't have big yards. they will go on rooftops. you need to have good southern access to sun. things that can impact your solar acce

do i hear any objections? hearing none, could we please consolidate this so we can get through one panel. if anyone objects to questioning as somehow creating a conflict, i will rule on it, but my intention is that i believe every one of the panel and everyone on both sides of the dias today, wants this hearing to accomplish the same fact-finding. so if the staff would get that done while we do the opening statement. the oversight committee exists to secure two fundamental principles. first, americans have a right to know the money washington takes from them is well spent. and second, americans deserve an efficient, effective government that works for them. our duty on the oversight and government reform committee is to protect these rights. our solemn responsibility is to hold government accountable to taxpayers because taxpayers have a right to know what they get from their government. we will work tirelessly in partnership with citizen watchdogs to deliver the facts to the american people and bring genuine reform to the federal bureaucracy. this is our mission. in 1978, the position of

doing it. . i think these panel members are here as part of their own entrepreneurial spirit. they own companies but love the city. they know the spirit of the city is one of innovation, that invites peoples and views, and smashes them -- meshes them together to see if we can make an even better san francisco. we have two other supervisors who may be coming later. we're all part of the initial group of policymakers at city hall who want to hear news views and ideas on the new collaborative economy. we're interested in it because it has aspects that have piqued our interest, about hoour environment, how to improve life for more people, how to make an expensive city more affordable to more people, how to utilize the strengths of the city as a great tourist city. how we can get more folks to come and experience the wonders of the city. maybe they will make their stake here. these panel members have decided to make their stake here. they risked reputation, may be small amounts of money. if they had a lot of money, they may not have had to start this. they have also done it for the

around at each other. >> it's mostly women. >> and this is my fifth panel so far at this conference. because my day job is mostly to do with quote unquote hard national security, i spoke to a panel on turkey and spoke on the panel on nuclear weapons, and this is the only panel that i am on with two other women, and this is the only panel i have been on with this many woman in the audience, and it tracks with what judith said as this as a career field, and that's wonderful and terrific and leading to wonderful things and understanding the empowerment of women in every area you could name, but what that means is the national security field looks like it did 20 years ago. it's much better. i would not have been running a nonprofit 20 years ago. we have four-star women generals now. but when we talk about why there is not money for aid and you have a fight within an administrati administration, who are the reporters that cover the issues, and this divide is mirrored in academia. and so i would challenge those of you who are young and who care about these issues that this field is not the only place you can work on them, a

the panel, it's always interesting when you're tapped to do a panel like this and you wonder if it's going to fit, are all the pieces going to work together? i think you all guys touched on very important issues that really speak to this issue of whole community. so i want to give you guys an applause and really thank you for taking the time to be here today. i also because i know some of you out there kind of want to acknowledge some people and some of the things that they've done i think that are very important contributions. nancy ward over here was my colleague in the state for a lot of years and has now been -- with fema for 10 years? and i got to tell you, nancy really did a lot to push forward funding for planning in the bay area when they were overlooking us and looking at the other areas in the country. because of her efforts we have now had a pretty steady stream of funding coming through. also want to acknowledge mike deyton in the state for this as well. but we've done i think some of the best regional planning in the country here in the bay area. and i have to -- in the

to do this we have set up an ig recommendation panel to receive materials from interested candidates. the panel is composed of experienced igs who represent different kinds of ig offices, who bring insight and experience to the process. with respect to the pasigs, the panel provides recommendations on an ongoing and continuous base ties the office of presidential personnel so that that office can consider candidates as vacancies arise. when a vacancy arises in a dfeig position, the panel contacts the appropriate agency head directly to offer its assistance in filling that vacancy. cigi actively reaches out to numerous groups to publicize this process and ensure that people who may be interested in ig positions understand the process that we play, the role that we play in the process, and that they are able to take advantage of that role. i should note here that while we do provide one source of ig candidates to appointing authorities, we are not the only source of candidates. for example, people who are interested in ig jobs can apply directly to the appointing authorities if they so

so before we turn it over to questions i would just like to throw out a couple of things to the panel. how do you see publishers reporting independent bookstores now? is there anything that you can do? >> well, i think, it is a matter of collaboration with specific others. we have a wonderful local of the and washington d.c. who is here. graciously hosted by politics and prose. a very successful event and i believe played a part in our ability. that does a good thing. >> anything publishers can do? >> well, it's a good question and one we wrestle with all the time. in fact, booksellers around the country. there are a lot of things. we would like, for example, to have a sort of greater recognition of the value of mind share, the influence that we bring, the fact that we drive sales across the industry because of our choices, because of the expertise of territorial abilities of our booksellers, the fact that we do a lot of promotion. as he was just saying, can really catapult a book or an author. so that will drive sales in other parts of the country, drive sales across the industry. and it is

panel. they always do a terrific job in bringing together great minds. i want to bring back the president of the american bar association, bill robinson. [ applause ] >> what a program. this has really been a very special occasion, lots to think, about lots to consider. this brings to a close or program. please join me again in expressing our appreciation to john and these distinguished panelists for a wonderful -- [ applause ] >> on behalf of the american bar association, i'd like to leave you with a thought after thanking you for joining us and making this a wonderful law day conclusion to our celebration and an expression of our concerns that if we didn't realize it before, we certainly realize now after this discussion that an independent, fair and impartial, adequately funded court system is the key to constitutional democracy and constitutional democracy. because no courts, no why is, no freedom. thank you all very, very much. [ applause ] >>> bin laden was a strategically relevant communicator with various and disparate outfits and i have to confe