states. so first just in general, if you can imagine a normal year for the individual market which may be hard to imagine, if you imagine a typical year what would insurance companies be thinking about as they develop premium rates for their customers? this slide gives you a picture of what are the factors that go into a premium. some of it is pretty obvious. they are looking at what kind of health services their enrollees are using and how many are likely to renew their policy. they are looking at market wide trends and what physicians and hospitals and drug companies are charging for their services and goods. they will be looking at the state or federal regulatory policy decisions. if there is a shift on federal policy that will be taken into account. they are looking at things like the status of affordable care act subsidies like cost sharing reduction that compensates insurers for the cost of low deductible plans that they are required to provide to low income enrollees. they will be look

in their state.ow concerned are you about the possibility of more cyber attacks ahead in the november midterm elections? jim: the briefings we have had and what has and reported is that the russians will attack us again. i don't see any reason why they wouldn't. we had secretary nielsen speak to us at a luncheon in philadelphia. she said the same thing. for us as secretaries of state across the country, we have been focused and working to overcome the issues around cyber security. keep in mind prior to august 2016, cyber security -- we were concerned about, but nothing like what happened after august of 2016. since that time i think all 50 states have been focused. eric: there are five states that completely use electronic voting machines that do not have a paper record. those states have told us for a story we recently published that they are not going to be replacing those machines before the midterm elections. they don't have time, even with the federal money that they have. do you consider that a

in conclusion, it is true that states, red states, blue states them a states across the country , we are not looking for a tax advantage. we are looking for tax parity. the chaos talked about in this committee and spoken of by witnesses today, that exists with the tens of thousands of businesses that have closed, hundreds of thousands of employees who lost their jobs because they can't compete adequately on the internet. it is those small businesses that i am elected to represent. it is those small businesses that are experiencing chaos of the chaos of not being able to compete in the marketplace because on time -- online retailers don't have to collect that tax, and that tax, they are fighting desperately to maintain that competitive advantage. in conclusion, this is a tax equity issue. businesses that want to take advantage of the market in my state and in every state should comply with the regulations in those states no different than they do with automobiles or alcohol, tobacco, or any other commodity. with that, i thank you for opportunity and look forward to questions. >> thank

to state. thank you again for the invitation to be able to be here it is my honor to join this conversation if only for a brief moment thank you for holding this hearing. from the national institutes of the standards of technology and mr. masterson from the department of homeland security. the. we have another panel after you and want to have a chance to ask questions so you can deal with h your time however you would like to, but if you want to summarize anything in your statement, we will have your statement in the record and we are glad to have it as we are glad to have you here today so we will start with the chairman of the advisory commission with you and then go to the commissioner mccormick and doctor romaine and mr. masterson. >> good morning chairman, ranking members of the committee. i am pleased to testify to discuss the assistance commission work to support the local leaders and efforts to conduct efficient accessible and secure elections. the commission takes pride in the resource

the state and some have not allow that. others said we will. regulates these? the states. there was an amendment that said all multiple welfare arrangements are regulated 100% by the state whether fully insured or self-insured. so how will i apply those? short-term plans who regulates them? the states. they have to decide what they want to do. and there are other areas like medicaid expansion.th now overall what they are looking at so they say how can i make this work better for the unsubsidized population? what can we do to stabilize thatt reinsurance. the healthier wealthier. it is too expensive. a family of four cannot afford that that is where state look at this how can i use waivers or other methods or give coverage that is where the states areng headed. i just a point ofth clarification they may not know the difference between the association health plan. >> all association health plan are multiple employer healthcare arrangements. they all involve multiple employers but not all multiple have health plans or other types of entities and then make it very clear everyth

not all states are -- 2016, not all states are resourced. that is the greatest opportunity for policy discussion. >> madam secretary you talk to some around the country as well on this. you shared a little light on the resources? >> i can vouch for the fact that the information, it is easy to quick fixedly -- fixed quickly if it is outdated. the second part of resourcing is important, the public sector, people working on this in government. at some point we need to invest in making sure the people at the local levels, you can have federal resources at the federal level, at dhs. if they cannot involve and engage with anyone on the local level. you're going blind. i think there are 2 pieces, first is equipment and the next is human resources. >> we talked a little bit about this, what is occurring, give us your opinion on how you see it, pro or con in terms of the sector. >> thank you, this one is clear, the homeland security act of 2003 provided the secretary of homeland security authority to lead the critical infrastructure activity across t

red states and blue states. this was not a partisan issue. we were absolutely struggling to understand what it was that it was going to mean to us. it did seem to me that they were looking to take over our elections, which have been for a long time considered a state function. i am of the camp that we should have some national standards on things. that is why i have been a supporter of the election assistance commission. unconscionable that .he funding has been reduced i think that is one area we could do better on, that congress could do better on, that the president has to do better on. i'm curious if you would like to speak to the question of whether the white house should be coordinating strategy. when i talk to people at dhs and the state level, they say they we are not seeing white house leadership on the issue. does that need to be here, or is it sufficient to have these folks at dhs? jim: all these federal agencies report to the president. and the president administration have to take a leadership role in this. we havehe discussions h

the united states army in alaska.corporation with the united states air force, the army in alaska is responsible for some of the most ultramodern electronic installations in the world. relay illion telephone network sending the voice of alaskans all over the world. army participation in the air defense of the nation dots the -- scape with intricateer intricate elements of warnings of air, missile and satellite operation. just one mile from fairbanks, the army maintains its most northern post. fort wayne wright. winter this far north is a serious business. but the long warm days of summer help make up for inconveniences f cold and dark. alaska is often called the gibraltar of the north because of its location as a strategic outpost of the united states. the army accordingly in addition to participation in air defense missions is constantly training and in readiness to defense alaska under the most realistic conditions possible. at fort great dealy, this training and testing program is ost evident. its climate is signif

but this company does not constitute the russian state. it does not represent the russian state. and i brought several examples before. well, you have a lot of individuals in the united states -- take george soros, for instance -- with multibillion in capital, but does it make him -- his position, his posture the posture of the united rates? -- united states? no, it does not. well, it's the same case. there is the issue of trying a case in the court, and the final say is for the court to deliver. we are now talking about the private individuals, not about particular states. and as far as the most recent allegation is concerned, about the russian intelligence officers, we do have an intergovernmental treaty. please do send us the request. we will analyze it properly, and we'll send a formal response. and as i said, we can extend this cooperation, but we should do it on a reciprocal basis, because we would await our russian counterparts to provide us access to the persons of interest for us who -- who we believe can have something to do with the intelligence services. let's discuss

our whole election involves states, not individual states. we have over 8,000 jurisdictions, 110,000 different polling places throughout all 50 states, and for the most part, it's a state issue, not the federal government. and i know in the omnibus that was passed in march there was over a merely $400 million that was granted for states to improve the election frux. and one of the big concerns that comes along with those kind of moneys and funding is states and people know when there's federal funding there are always strings attached to it. and states are leery of getting involved in accepting that kind of funds. i know in my home state of georgia that has certainly been an issue. mr. krebs, i want to start with you. how has the department of homeland security overcome some of the strings attached to the funding to try to help with election security? >> thank you, sir. i can't speak specifically to any of this the strings attached to the funding and would have to defer to commissioner hicks, but we have done at dhs working with the eac, work

states. and i want to get particular mention to richard nathan, who created and leads the research network and that played an important role in this project. he could not be here in person but is watching on the web cast. finally before i introduce our lead speaker mark hall, i want to mention that we've been busy running meetings, and we have two of them next week. on wednesday, we're having a conversation with scott gottlieb, fda commissioner, about biosimilars, and have an outstanding pam of three experts to react to his remarks. that's going to be wednesday afternoon at 1:30. also at the end of the week, we have a conference on the experience with mipps. i can't remember what it stands for. but those that are interested know it very well. and experience with mips to date and the policy options to address its shortcomings. so without further ado, let me into deuce ma-- introduce mark . [ applause ] >> thank you very much. it's been a quite interesting project and i appreciate the support t

state patc, -- but it would be state financed. we have stateng money and that provider tax expires at the end of 2019. if we don't have that resource, i think a lot of -- we will be very limited in what we can do and we will not be as proactive. that leads me to the midterm elections. a lot depends on what happens. governor's race and our previous governor is reentered from the republican side and very contentious. we are considered a tossup state , so it really depends what midterm.in this even in conclude, minnesota with our collaborative approach and history of working public-private partnerships, there is increasing division between the republicans and democrats, and i am hoping as a short-livedhat is and moved back toward a more collaborative approach. i think there are pressures from both sides to go into your own camp and not talk to each other, and work at opposite ends. i think we have shown that we can be active and proactive in terms of reacting to the changes, and i think insurance companies -- one of the things they s

they were transferred to the united states. they sent huge amount of money, $400 million as a contribution to the campaign of hillary clinton. that's their personal case. it might have been legal, the contribution itself. the way the money was earned was illegal. we have solid reason to believe that some intelligence officers, guided these transactions. we have an interest of questioning them. that could be a first step. we can extend it. options abound. they all can be found in an appropriate legal framework. >> did you direct any of your officials to help him do that? >> translator: yes, i did. yes, i did. because he talked about bringing the u.s./russia relationship back to normal. >> translator: i think there can be three questions from the russian pool. you have the floor. >> translator: thank you so much. good evening in everyone. >> mr. president, would you please go into the details of possibly any specific arrangements for the u.s. to work together with russia in syria, if any of these arrangements were made today or d

so prices were larger in the federal exchange states than the state exchange states. first of all, state-based exchanges invest more in making the market work. they have the structure and they have money on their own to pay for the outreach and marketing and navigation. there is also sort of the social political climate. these exchanges tend to be in more of the blue states that embrace the principle of the affordable care act, and the federal exchanges tend to be the more hostile state, and that plays out in terms of this basic political social dynamic, as well as the regulatory provision. state-based exchanges are more likely not to allow the transitional plans or the non-aca plans to continue, and the federal states are like, we'll do whatever you want. so those things, i think, build up over time. you can see that. they're not dramatically different but they are different. moving on to insurer participation. i have a lot of ground to cover and i realize i've already used over half my time. i'm already talking fast. we have seen dropoffs with insurers but the big p

it is sent why should teachers in one state he in another state? this doesn't take any money away from the states all the guys is take the american economy that is increasingly reliant on those electronic coffers to rationalize that. these are the steps that congress can take without in any way harming states in regard to the revenue they anticipate getting in will be getting as a result of this decision be met i would like to say i wish that the point that george just laid out we could've had that conversation three years ago before this case moved forward to the supreme court and they made their decision. the things that are built into the marketplace or with the remote transaction parity act is now congress has now carried it and a lot of what we have been saying is there is the pathway and it would have been a win for everyone but that is not the conversation we have been having the from a practical standpoint you have to look at state where the votes are. the job 24 states and none of the big one for the most part like california or texas or n

in conclusion, it is true that red states, blue states, purple states, states across the country -- we are not looking for a tax advantage. we are looking for tax clarity. the pay is -- the chaos that has been spoken about, that exists with the tens of thousands of businesses that have closed -- close to hundreds of thousands of employees who have lost their job. it is those small businesses that i am elected to represent. it is those small businesses that are expanding chaos. the chaos of not being able to compete in the market place because online retailers do not have to collect the 6% to 10% tax, they are fighting desperately to maintain that competitive advantage. in conclusion, this is a tax equity issue. businesses, that want to take advantage of the market in my state and in every state should comply with the regulations in those states do with automobiles, tobacco, or any other commodity. i look forward to questions. >>> thank you. welcome. >> thank you, thank you for the invitation. i am director of the interstate commerce initiative at the tax union, a policy project that fo

the whole system involves states of individual states. we have 8,000 jurisdictions, and hundred of ten different polling places through the states and for the most part it is a state issue, not the federal government. i know that in the omnibus passed in march there was over $400 million was granted for the infrastructure. one of the concerns that comes along with that kind of money and funding is states and the people. the states are weary of getting involved in accepting that kind of fund. if the strings attached the funding would have to defer to the commissioner. that information is based on a range of factors including some of the risk and vulnerability assessments we conducted the last year or so. there is a number of things that defined inconsistently across the states and networks. the georgia secretary of state applied for a security clearance with the dhs to try to access some of the shared classified information. we don't discuss these in the operational security to make mae secretary target a foreign intelligence collection i'

this draft dramatically states the states role, it also states what hinders federal and cc based -- the -- species based programs. should congress prioritize using any esa modernization efforts to increase federal funding to help states better increase efforts? >> i think that funding is the critical question here. a big part of that is because the information that i have shows that about a quarter of federally listed species receive $10,000 or less per year towards the recovery. that is just inadequate, we are never going to make the progress we need regardless of what states are doing if that is the kind of commitment that the federal government is able to make. >> thank you. can you talk about the funding needs for states in terms of federal funding for the management of endangered species? >> i agree with mr. strickler, it is essential. it is everything. to recover habitats, to conduct a science, to sit on recovery teams and develop these recovery plans all take resources right now that are coming from state or legislatively at the state level appropriated dollars. funding is probab

but we also have to be fair to the people of the united states and the taxpayers of the united states. youprime minister, thank again for joining me for these important discussions. we are both outsiders to politics. can you believe it? to politics.ers i look at all these wonderful politicians. we are determined to protect the rights and needs and interests of our citizens. i look forward to partnering with you to build on the incredible it from -- incredible friendship between our countries and to creating a brighter future for both the people of italy and the people of the united states. and with that, i want to thank you very much for coming to the white house. it is my great honor. prime minister conte: good afternoon, i want to thank you for your hospitality is it -- hospitality. it is a sign of the special attention to italy and me as well. forgive me, but i don't want to renounce the privilege for speaking in my wonderful language now. translator: i wish -- for all of families of the victims the fires at the place in california. i wish to say a very affectionate hello to all ou

the idea of states rights, the states have certain rights. who are the people who have evoked states rights before, and for what purpose before the war? abby? wait for the microphone again, make sure it is close so veryone can hear your intelligent questions and responses. student: before the war, it was southern politicians evoking states rights, but it was fundamentally to do with slavery. some politicians, like in the secession of south carolina, in their statements, they haven't states rights and the sovereignty of states, but now the federal government has won and the idea cannot stand any more. slavery is abolished and there is no sovereignty between the states, the federal government has the precedent. prof. sinha: exactly right. states rights is somewhat discredited. it was also used to secede from the union. it was the right of the state to secede from the union to protect slavery. states rights are connected with the institution of slavery and secession and civil war. it is somewhat of a discredited philosophy at this time. the issu

none of which play by different rules on a state-by-state basis. opponents of this bill will tell you, instances of cheating are remote. drug positives declining. the states are well on their way to uniformity. but the rules we have are fine. that their horses need race day medication, even though the rest of the world prohibits it. that out of competition testing isn't necessary. let me tell you about murray rowwho is, charged with wire fraud, conspiracy and misbranding of prescription drugs. a fellow trainer testified that private veterinarians told horseman which drugs were being tested for at the state's lab. horseman, of course, requested race-day treatments accordingly to avoid getting caught based on that knowledge. that was bad. but the performance of the racing commission was worse. they did nothing, and the fbi had to get involved. it's naive to suggest that these problems are not occurring in other states. travis taggart, ceo of the united states anti doping agency, will tell you that the most important part of usata's system is out of c

states, to the united and by the way, italy has a $31 billion surplus with the united states. meaning we have a $31 billion trade deficit. and we discussed that and we are going to work something out. prime minister conte's translator: as far as i'm concerned, i'm very envious of the records and the growth of the american economy. we discussed that before with donald. somehow these are systems which cannot be compared because of the magnitude of orders of magnitude -- i'm in this but ambitious at the same time. i'm ambitious for my economy to do a lot, much more than what was done in the past. we are preparing structural reforms that we will be submitting to our european partners, too. i do not want the tax reform to be set aside. it was a leverage in this country. it represents a leverage for economic growth. it represents a leverage for economic growth. we are also working on streamlining and simplifying red tape and registration and regulation to eliminate corruption pockets. we are trying to speed up the civil trials, the procedures and the proceedings for all sectors toge

another state pursuing what they are calling state-based plans is the state of idaho. we expect to see an announcement on that soon. we have also see north dakota and north carolina look at this as well. it is also important to be aware of the limits on states capacity to really step in and fill the role that the federal government has played. reinsurance may work for some states but not for all. some may lack the ability to generate the resources that are needed. some may not have the built-in infrastructure that minnesota or alaska have. and then there are other options that are just really tough in terms of political capital that would need to be expended. -- expended in order to get those policies through. i am hopeful that we will see more states lean in and step up to maintain and stabilize the markets, but i would not underestimate the challenges that lie ahead. thank you. >> well at kaiser family foundation we have been looking at insurer financial reports over the last several years and when we are talking about aca stabilization i think one thing to keep in m

only fall in those states, which is, i think, 20 states, but for states like california, new york, other states that are not plaintiffs to the case, it would be status quo. you know, we don't know what the court's going to decide. >> i think it's a great prank case because basically they took the argument that first roberts led in terms of justifying the individual mandate and then took the brief from the solicitor general in terms of what they were defending. in the event the individual mandate goes, because this is so tightly wound together, we've got to get rid of guaranteed issue and community rating. is the higher court going to swallow this? no, they'll come up with a new rationale. but in the meantime, i think the more narrow conspiracy view is that they might try a settlement before a full decision in the case and slow down the ability to appeal this for some period of time, let alone its application only in states that wanted it. and that could slow down what goes up to a higher court. >> i will say, i mean, if you read some of the legal commentary on this -- on the logic behind

state. having said that, mr. secretary, welcome and thank you for your service to our country. the members of this committee are strongly supported of strategic well-crafted diplomacy to advance america's foreign policy interests. unfortunately, all we have come to expect is a sabre rattling president who provides legitimacy to some of the world's most notorious bad actors and creates allies with those whose sons and daughters have gone to war. we have seen our president look weak as he stands besides our adversaries and intends to roll out the red carpet at the white house. i hear that's postponed until january, but nonetheless, to invite putin to the white house, a thug, who is actively trying to undermine our elections. they are showing the flashing lights of the ongoing aggression. senator graham and i and others plan to introduce legislation to ensure we have the latest tools to go after russian actors. as of this moment, we find ourselves in an unimaginable section. members of the pres

state culturally and economically. as part of our year-long 50 capitals tour, the c-span bus recently made a long journey to juneau, alaska, state. of the on this weekend, we will feature our stops across alaska, showing you the state's natural beauty. we will delve into alaska's unique history and literary culture. as part of our alaska weekend here on the c-span networks, we are talking about hunting regulations in alaska, and across the country. joining us for that is michael doyle of e&e news. joining us is michael doyle.

. >> now join us on our 50 states capital, from juneau, alaska is the lieutenant governor of that state. byron a lot. mallott. what are the duties of the lieutenant governor of alaska? lt. gov. mallott: the statutory duties are similar to many others. including, of course, taking office in the event that the governor's not able to. secondly, alaska, the lieutenant governor has statutory responsibility for the conduct of the state of alaska elections. each new legislature has the responsibility to review and sign regulations. duties,e, other officials,lected other duties have may be asked of the lieutenant governor by the governor and are also always there. in this administration, the governor has asked me to be his commercial fisheries advisor. on the -- i am the chair of his climate change initiative and that is significant responsibility without relationship with canadian provinces and territories regarding mining activity and keeping alaska's waters and flow from canada into alaska. i have been asked by the governor to do a variety of other things. including long-term responsibilitie

it tends to have a lot more bite when a state court justice is reviewing a state court legislature. any thoughts on that? his dissentnded of waiver ofinvolving the bankruptcy filing fee for people who were indigent and he talked about the need to understand what abject poverty was like so that you really could not save $1.28 a week when you were in that kind of abject poverty and that is his appreciation of the impact of the law on people's lives. -- c-span is covering this for the viewing audience. the case you are alluding to is the case where a man who filed for bankruptcy and most people who file for bankruptcy are broke and he could not afford the $50 filing fee and was torefore denied the ability achieve bankruptcy and justice perspective, as he did in case after case, i think of really what it was like to be poor and southerners poor."es say "dirt the case involving a school district that imposed a bus fee and refusing to waive that bus fee for an indigent family or indigent child teen miles away from school and he dissented in that case and said that is unconstitutional disc

for instance, when the governor of the state called the president of alabama state college, the president of alabama state college snapped too. one day the president of the governor of the state, john patterson called and said listen, you have a faculty member, lawrence d. retick, head of your history department. he is an agitator, attacking segregation. must be a communist sympathizer. you need to get rid of them. just like he expelled the student dissidents. now again, many faulted the president and the position he took, vis-a-vis the students. there was one correspondent that wrote the following. it is indeed unfortunate, this is a person writing from chicago. it is indeed unfortunate that you have become the hatchet man for the governor of alabama and expelled those kids. another person wrote him and said the uncle toms are supposed to be dead. does economic security mean so much? how will you face tomorrow? another observer wrote we must not jump every time the white man speaks. here's one more person. this is a correspondent from dayton, ohio who happened to be president trenholm's

nothing from the state department. i think it's also striking that hillary clinton that probably without knowing it had almost a p prebu prebuttal for this when she tweeted yesterday, president trump, do you know whose team you're playing for? today president trump himself did not seem to know the answer to that question. >> yeah, they're certainly sharing the ball and they did on that stage. let's go to manu raju for congressional reaction as we continue to monitor what, if anything, republicans are saying from capitol hill. manu? >> reporter: we haven't heard a whole lot from republicans yet, anderson. one reason why is because this is monday and members are just starting to trickle in. we've heard some members on twitter, the republicans, the usual critics of president trump voicing their significant concern. people like ben sasse calling it bizarre to say that the united states was involved and bears some responsibility for the deteriorating u.s. relations with russia. jeff flake, the retiring senator from arizona

security clearances in states and rapid communication state-to-state and state to the federal government. all help maintain the integrity of our licks. -- of our elections. that's what we do in the secure elections act. that's why i think it is so important that we try to resolve this as quickly as possible. i encourage this body to finish the markup in the rules committee, to be able to bring it it to the floor and have a consistent, bipartisan vote, to be able to support the work that we need to continue to do to be able to protect our elections in the days ahead. our republic is one that maintains its stability based on the integrity of our elections. i have zero doubt the russians tried to destabilize our nation in 2016 by attacking the core of our democrats. of our democracy. anyone who believes they will not do it again has missed the basic information that is how day after day after day in our intelligence briefings. but the russians have done it the first time. they showed the rest of the world the lesson in what could be done. it could be the north koreans next time. it could be

no roads connecting it to the rest of the state. despite this, it is a popular destination for cruise ships and tourists coming to ride the mount roberts tram and visit the glacier. we continue our special look at alaska with a visit to its capitol building, built in 1931. the alaska state that startedilding construction in 1929 and was completed in 1931. was originally the federal and territorial building and the transition of alaska to a state. juneau was the designated capital in -- .s the capital of the district the primary industry and alaska at the time was gold-mining, and gold was discovered in juneau in 1880. it was the biggest town in the area, certainly the center of it wasy in the area, so the most important city at the time. the traditional capital, from thena, was in cognac, and it went to -- then congress designated juneau as the capital of the district. this building was originally constructed for $712,000, about eight dollars per square foot. the total cost, including furnishings, was about $1 million. this is a mod

of the balkan states. today, the baltic states are free, allies and we recently visited latvia and heard about their determination to remain free and take strong steps. finland and latvia, the baltic states, other allies of ours in that region prepared to invest more in their own defense and to strengthen their defenses against russian interference in the upcoming elections. there's elections in latvia and sweden happening soon. what best practices are you seeing among our european allies? what tools do you think the state department can and should be using and how should we be doing as you put it everything we can to push back on likely election interference by russia to our vital allies as well as to our upcoming midterm elections? >> it's a good question. we, the united states government, i'll -- my previous organization, intelligence world, did a great deal of work with our european partners, with the german election, french election. trying to help identify threats and vectors, good, solid intelligenc

and the great state of alaska has been doing great things for their community, their state, their country. we call that person our alaskan of the week. now, from the on-set, we've tried to focus on people generally who are unsung heroes in their communities. people who have worked diligently a lot of times without a lot of recognition, and i get to, with my colleagues, come down here and tell stories about what they've done for their community or their state or even their country. but other times we've recognized someone in our state who has made the headlines, someone whose contributions are well-known through all parts of the state, and we just do because it we want to reemphasize it, because it's important. today we're going to recognize one of those people who's well-known in alaska but we think is worthy certainly of the title alaskan of the week because of all he has donald trump his name is bill sheffield who was our state's governor in 19 he 82 and has spent his adult life making alaska a better place for all of us. now, governor sheffield's story in alaska embodies what many of u

the islamic state itself. disillusionment sets in and in the end. a number of them attempt to leave and that overall shape coming through the series as a whole was probably gave our audience a more realistic sense of the reality of life in the islamic state so what about the want to be terrorists i mean surely amongst your audience were people who were just about to go and join isis do you think having seen the film some of them were like well you know what i'm not doing this i would have thought so of course it's very difficult to tell because these people are not easy to identify. if they were drawn in by the first episode and then watched in two episodes two three and four and saw the reality of life and they would have seen a number of things in there that they would have known from the researches were accurate because we were very very careful to get this is accurate as we could yes i think they would have had second and third thoughts about going out there but of course as a said earlier you know the the

states. doesn't trump. choose into the you or the people who are these series who you're ultimately agree with mr trump in the in these coalition he wanted to in a gesture in to then he change you follow the same policy that we don't create do you think you may have other things in common with mr trump and at least in the way how he conceptualizes there is no newcomer in purple common policy between us and the sitra and that there could be no more overlap of views on how the region develops we're not. because we know that. he. has your only policy you know or the war you're against any kind o. expansionism and any kind of. or any other country now as the americans keep on insisting on the. removal of the iranian presence as they put it in syria they and their allies seem to be in trenching and the eastern you're freydis and i'm sure you know the mr trump's current national security advisor mr bolton wants advocated for the creation of the so-called sunni stand a quasi state that includes parts of syria and

from creating west german state. so in june of 48 the institutes the famous blockade of berlin, was ultimately overcome as we know by a heroic airlift operated by western allies, in particular of course the united states, which actually continued not only for the winter of 48 and 49 but it wasn't wrapped up entirely until september of 1949. it was a remarkable success but it wasn't just the airlift. the united states and its allies instituted counter blockade which have devastating effects on the economy in eastern germany and the soviet union, which was one of the factors that convinced stalin finally to lift the blockade. so in may of 1949, west germany, a new state, is created. in september of 1949, conrad adenauer is elected chancellor of the new federal republic of germany. in october stalin creates his own new east german state and now the borders, they geographic borders of the cold war conflict in europe are effectively frozen for 40 years. let me talk briefly about the marshall plan itself. what did it actua

the states agree to try the experiment but the six new england states and 11 others declined. the mayor of plymouth, massachusetts where programs and celebrated the first things giving in 1621 said that we here in plymouth consider the date sacred. and so, in plymouth massachusetts on the fourth thursday in november, 1,943,000 men, women and children put on program costumes and poured into memorial hall to commemorate the first things giving. some of them play the parts of governor william bradford, military advisor myles standish and the indian leader and they reenacted scenes from the past and the signing of the mayflower compact that was the first written expression of democratic self-government and the landing at plymouth rock in the first things giving. in the early evening as they all streamed out a memorial hall into the fresh polling snow in wintry stillness and they are the shouts of newsboys selling the thursday evening paper and germany bombs plymouth and 200 tons of bombs fall on plymouth. for eight long hours and not see this offer had dumped its lethal cargo of b

how do we help you in your state? monetize or bring in the private sector, and how does that get recycled? to areioritization is you involved in the private sector? sector.les were by but it can be about region too. the private sector will be more compelling the cousin is more economically viable in the urban area. how does that get reallocated's that is complicated from the ownership of assets. how do you get it from one units quality to us -- municipality to us? it is a source of capital, so how does the private sector help one municipality raise money or .unds areas funds at the state level can be freed up. that is part of the dialogue that has to happen so that that kind of honesty about where the maid is, where private sector is best can be had. from my perspective, having worked infrastructure for 20 years, it seemed to go quickly. having those discussions such that you can plan is important. is our would like to see competitors being tremendously successful investors and being appreciated by you in the communit

it depends on the state. we cannot basically regulate to -- >> i'm not suggesting regulation, i'm suggesting suggestion -- i mean, it seems to me this is a basic thing, we are not saying that they have to do it, but if you don't have a paper backup it's very hard to determine whether you've got an accurate count. >> paper is interesting because everyone can't use paper. so if you have a disability, you come back from iraq with no hands, it's hard to do that paper piece of it. so i would say that if we can do security with paper, to make sure that it's accessible to those who have disabilities, then i would say that that's 100% right that we should have a paper backup. >> i want to direct a question to mr. romine and mr. masterson. i serve on the intelligence committee and we spend a lot of time with cyber security issues in the intelligence community. one of the most powerful tools we have is the red team and bug bounties. it seems to me -- one of my concerns is that the states are at varying levels of securi

the united states does not do these things. i'm a big critic of the chinese, but the chinese don't do these things. i have other problems with them. the the belgians don't do this. the japanese don't do this. only one country in the world has weaponized information like this to interfere in the election of an adversaries. that's the russian federation under vladimir putin. now, the other argument i've heard is, well, what's wrong with better relations are russia? nothing is wrong with better relations with russia. i'll tell you right now the world would be a better place, a more peaceful place, our lives would be a little easier, we would be stronger if somehow we had a partner in the russian federation that we could work with to deal with things like terrorism and proliferation of nuclear weapons and iran and all sorts of issues, north korea. we all wish we had that, but the reason why that isn't happening frankly is not us, it's vladimir putin. because for vladimir putin, better relations is not what he's interested in. he is

there's a lot going on at the state and local level. between mexico and the united states. it is a personal story for me because i lived there for almost six years in the 1990s. i went back and forth frequently. it was hard to believe that these were similar in sized cities close to each other. because they were so distant and some new ways. it was a rough-and-tumble city. piecework low value added manufacturing. san diego was a beautiful but isolated beach town. i was hard to imagine that they would ever get together. something started to happen in the early 2000 began to evolve. its own research and department operations. you saw the growth of some state capacity. and the cultural scene coming out of there. has anyone gone to tijuana not to tijuana for lunch or dinner. they have some of the best food scenes anywhere in mexico. anywhere on the west coast as well. great success this to goes from electronic to classical music and opera. i say this in my peril. i know it was a little bit of competition here. san diego was once the quiet little town. a nice place to go visit.