the implied preemption claim is different. it seeks to impose a duty of fair dealing and superimpose it ogthe bargain even when parties to the contract have essentially given one party absolute discretion. >> the argument was made that if the airline has an unreviewable right to terminate this agreement for any reason or for no reason, if that is so, then it's an illusory contract. what is your answer to that? if one party can get out willy-nilly, what kind of bargain is it? >> there are a couple answers to that. the first is, i think although the focus on whether a contract is illusory is sometimes used as part of the analysis under the implied covenant for a bilateral kraekt. i don't think it would apply to something like a frequent flier program which i think would be understood as a unilateral contract where you don't worry about the illusory promises. the second thing is i think you have to understand -- >> i'm not sure i understand that point. >> there is a distinction if you go back to the contract law between a unilate

not only do we have signal priority but signal preemption at six intersections so we're looking -- >> can you explain the difference there? >> yes. priority means if the vehicle is approaching a green light it will get priority whereas preemption is a step up above that. not only it holds everything in place as the vehicle is coming it stops everything else and gives preemption to the train, so any other signal you may have -- say if you have a traffic signal it would be downgraded and the train would preempt it so it's just for us it should be able to give us when you look at the length of r from sunnydale say to carol and give us more and we will evaluate and come back to you on this. >> do you have an estimate of what it will be? >> the engineers are estimating it should be from the trunk from sunnydale up to cal train five to seven minutes with all of these in place which would be significant. >> and when do you plan to put this in place? >> it is in place. we're in the process of measuring it, its effectiveness right now. it's been turned on for about three weeks. >> that's good

in these things in germany twelve we don't want to accidentally back into some kind of federal preemption case i know this sounds like i'm changing the subject but when arizona when arizona said we want to make sure we're protecting our borders and all of that that was preemption that was getting the way of the broad scope of things this might be a case of that but i hope the administration gives them a break and lets federalism operate there in a case where they would let arizona ok i think you just said we all agree but maybe not i don't know horace cooper chris hall and thank you very much thank you for. coming up having a middle class is a choice not a fall option so what choices have we made as a society to put the american i just got the american middle class the answer inside st. dramas to be ignored to. stories others refuse to go to. places changing the world. to picture. you. from around the globe. to. my marinates join me on. that impartial and financial reporting commentary for news and much much. only on the bus and. i mean on the left are. when the obama supporters to the ph

what is the help to be preemption rate at points of entry because they try to get between the entry not just between. between. what are the number of the vsat overstays? that isn't reported regularly. all of these should be a part of the annual performance report. there are challenges and i'm happy to talk about it in the q-and-a but it could be done. there is a pretty good model for how to do this. the border security results act that was passed last year by the homeland security committee and the chairman of texas who is no softy on this issue that bill sets out achievable goals and how the administration should assess and evaluate progress towards those goals. and in case anyone thinks it is impossible to find a consensus on the topic that the bill passed the homeland security committee in the house unanimously. every single democrat and every republican on that committee was in favor of that bill. so there is an approach that we can agree on. thanks very much. [applause] >> hello everyone. thank you simon and everyone for being here. i'm going to talk a little bit, these guys have d

with the implementation plan's heavy emphasis on conservation, research into climate change and preemption on development on state, native and federal lands, and it's difficult for me to see any support by this administration for economic development, for job creation or really for a better quality of life for the people who live in the far north. so again, when we talk about the national strategy for the implementation plan, climate is absolutely an issue that needs to be discussed and addressed. absolutely. development issues clearly need to be addressed. conservation clearly needs to be addressed. but we have to remember that there are people who live and raise and raise their families and work up in the arctic. and so making sure that we are thinking about them as we advance an implementation plan is key. but even with the implementation plan being rolled out in january, i thought, okay, there's still not enough meat on the bones here for me to really understand how we move forward with a set of priorities, a real vision for the arctic. but, i knew that the president's budget was going