and, you know, clearly and secretary tauscher, i welcome your thoughts as well, the roll out of the state's adaptive approach, a really important and strong policy but how it was communicated on the day it was communicated. it just left a huge challenge for the region and i think the administration has worked extremely hard to overcome that initial challenge and i think we're seeing a stronger u.s. central european relationship but i think we can do more. again, that's a self-inflicted problem. i think another example would be the pivot to asia. i think in some ways the selection of the word is a loaded word, what is the fiscal manifestation of pivot. well, you turn your back. so did we turn our back to, as we're moving to asia, did that cause concern to our european friends and how do we message that to europe? the interesting part is europe is pivoting to asia. thera they're pivoting in trade, investment. how are we managing this together? right now it feels as though we're managing it separately but i think we need to do more. sometimes it is that word use. it is communicating such a new

also, our open el lep tauscher, former chair woman of the strategic forces subcommittee recently said back in january that the e.u. draft code of conduct was too restrictive. so that lends credence to this amendment wanting to not have the administration enter into binding agreements on anything similar to the e.u. code of conduct. so even if you call it something else like an international code of conduct -- i think that's what the administration is labeling as an alternative approach. let's don't go down the road of letting binding agreements be made without senate and congressional oversight and approval. that's what this amendment does. i would urge its adoption. >> would the gentleman yield? >> yes. >> is a code of conduct the same thing as a treaty? >> a treaty requires senate approval. >> and a code of conduct does not? is that correct? >> i'll ask staff to help on that interpretation. >> mr. lamborn, if you would like to yield. >> can i yield the balance of my time to mr. turner? >> we had a hearing on this very matter in our subcommittee. in the hearing it is clear that this

my question is, i hesitate to ask it after miss tauscher's last comments but you would think that will everyone wants to prevent a recurrence of the lehman brothers event that it is a worldwide financial crisis. so is there no hope that the issue of contributing to a european fire wall couldn't be explained to the american public in those terms we want to prevent a worldwide contagion after a greek exit? no? no hope? >> professor harris? >> stephen hill. it's been a fascinating discussion. thank you. in terms of the issue of debt, i think that a couple of points very quickly. one, most countries in europe, most member states are actually not in that much debt. it's just really a handful that you're talking about. if you look at the euro zone as an aggregate, it doesn't have that much debt. it has less debt than the united states has. it doesn't have much of a trade deficit. many of the economic fundamentals are fairly good for the eurozone. the probably the euro zone has is a balancing. have you surplus member states and deficit member states. california where i live, we've been bailin

miss tauscher i very much share some of your concerns. you mentioned the problem of public's level of interest in information on foreign policy issues. but i think there's a missing link here and that link is the role of the media in providing accurate and sometimes any information about some of the foreign policy issues that are of great concern to you and some of the other foreign policy experts and people in government, and so seen from your perspective, not perhaps just you but from the others, what can be done to strengthen this link because there are obviously problems in the business of news, the problems of differentiating between news and opinion, the fact that people now in this media landscape self-select the kind of news sources that they will have which does affect their opinions and views on foreign policy issues. so what can be done? because once the american public is given, informed information about issues, they can give informed decisions and be part of the foreign policy debate. i mean, this has been done with james fi

and, you know, clearly -- and secretary tauscher, welcome your thoughts on this as well.you know, again, the rollout of the adaptive approach, a really important and strong policy, but how it was communicated on the day it was communicated, it just left a huge challenge for the region. and i think the administration has worked extremely hard to overcome that initial challenge. and i think we're seeing a stronger u.s./central european relationship, but i think we can do more. again, it's a self-inflicted problem. i think another example would be the pivot to asia. i think in some ways the selection of the word is a loaded word, what is the physical manifestation of pivot? some well, you turn your back. who did we turn our back to if we're moving to asia? was that europe? did that cause concern to our european friends? and how do we message that to europe? the interesting part is europe is pivoting to asia. they're pivoting in trade, investment, their economic relationships. so how are we managing this together? right now it feels as if we're managing it separately, but i t

i hesitate to ask because of the tauscher's last comments. you would think that everyone wants to prevent the lehman event which was a worldwide financial crisis. is there no hope of contributing to a european firewall that couldn't be explained in the american public that we wanted to prevent a worldwide event? no? >> steven hill. it's been a fascinating discussion. thank you. in terms of the issue of debt, i think that a couple of times very quickly -- most countries in europe and member states are actually not in that much debt. it's really a handful. many of the economic fundamentals are some of the problems that europe has. part of the problem is balancing. you have member and deficit. they don't have a transfer. like in california, we've been bailing out mississippi and alabama. that's how the transfer union works. there's no correlation between the debt and the economy in trouble. look at japan as one of the highest debts in the world. uk has actually a higher debt than france has and is borrowing at lower rates. united states is borro

kayla tauscher is live with the latest on that and, kayla, on the future for bob greifeld of that companyxecutive compensation was voted in today's meeting which surprisingly lasted only 23 minutes. we talked to some analysts on the call and they, too, didn't hear any q&a so we haven't seen a transcript but it appears there were no questions broadcast. you look at shares down just slightly and the only mention of facebook we heard on the webcast we were listening to, that in a positive light, that it still remains a value proposition, that it's stronger than ever as far as listing on the nasdaq talking about western digital switching over just yesterday, a $9 billion market cap company, and that the value proposition was strong and that's the only mention of what happened with facebook on friday throughout the entire meeting today, this morning, carl, even though that meeting was extremely short and shorter than expected since people familiar with the meeting were expecting a large q&a session and one that included a lot of questions about-face book. >> yeah, even despite the aggressivene

the third panelist will be ellen tauscher who is a special envoy for missile defense with the state department since february. from june 2009-every 2012 she served as under secretary of state for arms control. she was a member of the house from january of 1997 to june of 2009. thank you for being here. >> thank you very much. i think i have to start out by debating a little bit of the whole characterization of the discussion. i do not think it is a big debate between republicans and democrats. i think it is really between those who would favor a robust u.s. international leader across the board and those who are more concerned that we cannot for for that anymore. i think that is really the debate. i would not go so far as to call it isolationism, but there's some of that emotional element of why we're spending so much when we have so many problems at to fix.n wwe need there's a real division there appeared to talk about where we are and where we go, -- division there. when we talk about where we are and where we go, it is going to be the same set of problems. it is going to be a challenge to d