speaker, the administration blames the violence in america on gun dealers and congress. so the administration is going to issue some more executive memos and unilaterally ignore the second amendment. never mind that the administration's illegal action would not have prevented any of the tragic mass shootings in recent years. the administration's -- the administration should be prosecuting criminals who use guns, not vetoing the second amendment. the administration's executive action on gun control is just the latest example of white house attempting to bypass the

this whole process started under the bush administration, but under the obama administration it took off. succeed,e that we can but we have come a long way. to aving from sanctions totally different issue. given your role and the effort to close what time i'll -- guantanamo, i wanted to ask you a few thoughts on that. the president made clear from the moment he took the oath of office that closing that facility a major priority for him. we are now in his final year in office. and so he's got a little less than, little more than a year, almost a year exactly, to try to carry this out. of course, there is a lot of discussion about the role that that facility plays in our reputation overseas. can you talk a little bit about why this does remain so important for a president to do --s, and what, when we you when you were working on this issue, the obstacles that you faced in terms of trying to move forward on this presidential priority? mr. fried: let me go back to the bush administration. it is sometimes forgotten in the that the bush administration, president bush, also wanted to close o

people criticize the administration from the left or the right. as lawyers in the defense department, representing defense interests. you can do this. president obama went looking for some lawyer for some authority in the administration. they found a guy named harold koh former dean of yeah law school. he was known in the academic world for arguing the president cannot act unilaterally. even better, he argued that with president reagan bombing libya for 12 minutes that that implicated the war powers act. and somehow came to the conclusion that bombing libya for months at a time did not constitute hostilities and therefore the president can go ahead and do it. >> kinetic military action. >> the argument call you only bombing them, not actually at risk unless they get hit by stray aircraft and antiaircraft missiles. one problem with that is that again the war powers act was largely meant to prevent cambodia from ever happening. the rules say you're not allowed to ask. past sexual history. so just to take an example let's say a video circulates aroun

this whole process started under the bush administration, but under the obama administration it took off. succeed,e that we can but we have come a long way. to aving from sanctions totally different issue. given your role and the effort to close what time i'll -- guantanamo, i wanted to ask you a few thoughts on that. the president made clear from the moment he took the oath of office that closing that facility a major priority for him. we are now in his final year in office. and so he's got a little less than, little more than a year, almost a year exactly, to try to carry this out. of course, there is a lot of discussion about the role that that facility plays in our reputation overseas. can you talk a little bit about why this does remain so important for a president to do --s, and what, when we you when you were working on this issue, the obstacles that you faced in terms of trying to move forward on this presidential priority? mr. fried: let me go back to the bush administration. it is sometimes forgotten in the that the bush administration, president bush, also wanted to close o

people criticize the administration from the left and right.more importantly obama zone lawyer said you can't do this. you have to go to congress. with the defense department these are folks that are representing defense interest, they said you can't do this. so president obama went around looking for some lawyer to say that you can do this. he found howard company who is former law school. howard was known in the academic world -- he even argued that president reagan bombed libya for all 12 minutes in 1986 and that implicated the war powers act. somehow he came to the conclusion that bombing libya for months at a time time 15 years later did not constitute hostilities within the meaning of the act. therefore the president could go ahead and do it. the argument supposedly was that we are only bombing them and therefore american forces are not at risk unless they get hit by a straight aircraft missile. one problem with that is that the war powers act is largely meant to prevent cambodia from ever happening. cambodia was solely an air campaign. j

welcome to the plenary session on economic policy in the bush administration. rking with me today at the session is the provost who will be asking some questions and we are happy to have three presenters although one is still at the airport and hopefully will get here in time but if not people still have two magnificent speakers who can give us some insight on how economic policy development was in the bush administration and you can then extrapolate how it may have been in other administrations. our first speaker today is a currently vice president and senior accomplice at the federal reserve bank in dallas. a labor economist working a regional account growth and demographic change she manages to reach a bowl berth in the dallas federal research department and is executive editor of the quarterly publication southwest economy. her academic research focuses on the labor market impact of immigration on authorized immigration and u.s. immigration policy. she is a co-author of the book beside the golden door u.s. immigration reform in the new era of globalization.

and the obama administration. as opposed to congress having at some point done its job to re-authorize and clarify the clean water act in those intervening 28 years. i'm not aware of any plan. i pretty well aware of the chairman has told me the agenda for the coming year, rewriting the clean water act and debating the merits, demerits of certain protections is not on that agenda to the best of y kwledge. the effects of what the courts have done is to stick us with the bush era rules for two more years. and the effect of what we are doing here would actually stick with the bush era rules indefinitely. pick your poison. bottom line is we are doing a disservice to the country by not getting these commonsense exemptions in place as soon as possible. i have a number of letters, too numerous to reference here. but we'll meet, i believe, the standard in terms of length that i'd like to insert for the record. i will say that there are with of, being co-chair of the caucus, there is a very strong representation by the craft

the bill was blocked by the administration. s a matter of fact, as that session no foreign policy initiatives came up in the senate because the senate leader at the time was concerned that this would be attached to it ever get to conference or to get to the president's desk. i think this was an absolute blunder. and i think we've got to get back to the issue of whether or not they are going to be consequences. one of the things we were assured of was that if we went forward with this agreement it would be enforced at a secondary argument that was made on the floor of the house of representatives was, look, there already are u.s. sanctions in place. we will enforce the idiocy of violation of either the issue of icbm testing. we have now had to violations, and what happened? the administration begin to move forward with some very feminine is partial sanctions, informed us in congress come and visit us there was pushed back from iran, they pulled it back. also we were assured that it the would be no lifting of sanctions against tho

the administration is making this bad deal even worse. now, the president promised the american people that this bad deal still allows nonnuclear-related sanctions on iran. good for the president. great promise. and iran, not to the shock of any of us, have violated some of the rules that they are to abide by. they violated two u.n. resolutions restricting ballistic missile tests last month. so the treasury department told congress it would levy new sanctions on iran's primary financial sanctions. that would support the president's promise to america. but at the last minute, the state department got involved and said, whoa on those sanctions. not so fast. and no sanctions. more shaky knees, mr. speaker. why does the administration waffle on calling iran out for violations? america's national security interests seem to take a backseat to confronting iran politically. so i support h.r. 3662. this is an important bill to ensure the president can't lift sanctions on those institutions and individuals who are involved in terrorism. remember, mr

iran is testing the administration's boundaries. you're only seeing this accelerate since the deal was signed with iran. that's why as my first day in office i will repeal the deal that barack obama has signed with iran. they'll use that money to build up their conventional capability, including the navy to continue to build their long-range missiles. to sponsor terrorism so i think you're only going to see a continued pattern of provocation, as long as a weak president like barack obama is in the white house. >> state of the union address tonight. his last. the administration is forecasting it will be different, more optimistic. looking towards the future. say republicans are pessimistic and are overlooking some of the positive things happening. >> i'm optimistic because barack obama is going to be gone in a year and i'm going to be the next president of the united states. on my first day in office i will begin to revoke and reverse all the damage this president has done to this country. this is a president that believes that americ

so what has prevented the administration from doing? he astonishing answer is provided biden other than john brennan. who said i have never found a case that legal authorities are legal interpretations that prevent us from doing something could that be correct? bin then asked the same question if they had not done something they wanted to do because the lawyers said it would be illegal. and then with the iraqi prisoners but i myself had the saving question in mind in one additional instance and was told though you cannot legally do something i could not find a single example. this sobering record seems to belie that claim that they were merely misunderstood. to be more of the nature of decoration instead of restraints of which the policy is formed. in to discipline the internal dialogue end up to a point i am sure that is true that over the up to a point. john mitchell and charles all were lawyers. as the obama administration is the most heavily embroidered in history. the nixon administration is surely a close runner-up. it doesn't reve

we call on the administration to announce u.s. sanctions involved in iran's ballistic program and ensure that iran is held and i continue to quote. inaction from the united states in the wake of the joint greement the agreement and other offensive actions including syria, yemen, and this behavior including ballistic missile tests poses a direct threat to american national security interests in those and those of our allies and mr. speaker, this was signed by representatives lowey, our esteemed colleague, mr. engel, the leader of the democratic national committee for congress, debey wasserman schultz, mrs. davis a mr. nadler. and we agree with them. we agree with them that these sanctions should be upheld. that the law is the law. that the 2010 iran sanctions accountability and divestment act is still the law. that's what this bill does. there are claims that this wasn't done in a bipartisan fashion. i spoke to mr.ening ell. i reached out to democratic leadership in august and i have been working this bill since july. i regret becau

stagnation has become the new normal for the obama administration. in addition to the lack of economic opportunity, families have had to show renewed burdens thanks to the obamacare administration. chief among these is obamacare, the president's health care law that failed to reduce the cost and ripped away millions of americans preferred plans and forced families on to insurance plans they don't want and can't afford, gives patients access to doctors and hospitals, increased taxes, and wasted billions of taxpayer dollars. then there are the burdensome regulations the obama administration imposed that made it more challenges for businesses large and small to grow and create jobs. the environmental agency p-- environmental protection agencies has implemented one damaging rule after another. from backdoor energy tax that hurts poor and working families the most to a new rule that would subject puddles in american's backyards to a complex array of burdensome and regulatory requirements. again and again, i have heard from south dakota ranch owners about t

every talk to the administration? >> absolutely it is a critical issue in california even though we're starting to see rainfall is a welcome sign but we need major cooperation between federal and state ever meant that the greatest extent possible we're keeping in storing got watered knowing we are a long way. it is a struggle it is a very complicated issue for those at the white house we have talked about literally be in the weeds to count the fish the second we can turn on the pump we can do that. >> they are focused on the issue but i don't think we have seen the resolution we need to see it is incumbent on the federal and state government to manage that water situation of course, there are great debates when the time is to turn them on the major every drop of water that can be stored for next summer is stored. >> mayor, first of all, my condolences to your team in denver. [laughter] also congratulations to ge with the job subtractions to cities. in boston young people graduate and they step one dash 10 to stick arou

thornberry: it is not clear to me what is going on inside the administration. of course, it is not just the pentagon. it is the white house that really sends the budget over to us. i think you are exactly right. the agreement last year was for a minimum for the base defense budget. then, a minimum for the overseas contingency account to pay for operations. everybody acknowledged that the exact amount of operations depends on the world and what is happening. we have more people in afghanistan than was expected. we are sending more people into syria, for example. it is not clear to me what final position the administration is going to take. budgetar agreement did not give defense enough money. i think a number of folks in the pentagon, and elsewhere, believe -- if the administration is saying it will not be there after all, i think that will be very troubling. mr. herb: if the budget comes up with a shortfall, will be see congressional republicans try to plus up the shortfall? rep. thornberry: it is clear on both sides of the aisle what the agreement was. a minimu

the bill was blocked by the administration. s a matter of fact, as i recall, in that session, no foreign policy initiatives came up in the senate because the senate leader at the time, reid, was concerned that this would be attached to it and it would get to conference or could get to the president's desk. i think this was an absolute blunder. and i think we've got to get back to the issue of whether or not there are going to be consequences. now, one of the things we were assured of, dani, was that if we went forward with this agreement, it would be enforced. and a secondary argument that was made on the floor of the house of representatives, was look, there already are u.n. sanctions in place, we'll enforce those if we see a violation of either the issue of icbm testing, we've now had two violations, and what happened? the administration began to move forward with some very de minimis partial sanctions, informed us in congress, and as soon as there was pushback from iran, they pulled it back. also, we were assured that there w

former defense secretaries from the obama and clinton administrations on the state of u.s.-china relations, live at 5:00 p.m. eastern here on c-span 3. >>> students around the country are working on c-span's student cam documentary contest telling us the issue they want the presidential candidates to discuss. through social media we're following students as they produce their videos. here is a tweet from indiana. canterbury ft. wayne eighth grade students were excited to hear ben carson. also, illinois representative john shimkus tweeted, i was interviewed by students for their c-span project. $100,000 in prizes with a grand prize of $5,000. the deadline is january 20th, 2016, and the winners will be announced on march 9th. visit our website student cam.org. >>> now, gina mccarthy talks about the paris climate agreement while stressing the need for climate change adaption and environmental technology. this runs about an hour. >>> welcome, everybody. thanks for coming out. i am delighted -- my name is

and then katrina was another big story in the bush administration. and then i will end with this one. the seven deadly sins of the meltdown. envy, gluttony, sloth, pride, .reed, wrath has -- he is buying a plasma tv. sloth is a politician and bureaucrat. at the switch. there is pride saying don't blame us. greed and lust was so rampant on wall street. sometimes you do a cartoon. everything just falls together. those are the good days when things fall into place. thank you. [applause] >> not starting yet. >> i have my timer. >> now it is time. i'm just going to start with my cartoons because we only have six minutes. the big people to have loved the salaries -- love the saudis. anything they did, bush would it is not a problem. i did "love means never having to say you are saudi." andey came into the office said we finally have our mandate, bush says, i thought that was illegal in 11 states. this happened during the time a lot of the prosecutors in the states were being let go. i forget why they were being let go. so i had two guys talking. the justice

if the obama administration is the most heavily lawyered in history, the nixon administration is surelylose runner-up. the watergate tapes do not seem to reveal an oval office in which the dialogue was disciplined by a desire to comply with the rule of law. as a lawyer, i'll close by simply noting i understand that dynamic. all lawyers like to make their clients happy, and obama's lawyers are no exception. sometimes, however, a lawyer simply has to be an abominable no man. you don't see many abomb abominable no man leaping out of the pages of "power wars." what does leap out is the deep and enduring influence of the permanent security state. thank you. [applause] >> before we open it up for questions, let's -- i was going to give charlie a chance to respond, and not to pile on, but, you you know, i've never ft worse about going to law school than this morning. [laugher] and just to amplify one of michael's points, in addition to the end run around the office of legal counsel to continue the war in libya beyond the war powers resolution's time limits, more broadly, you know, the definiti

the 24th administrator of the u.s. small business administration, maria contreras-sweet. you're recognized for five minutes or perhaps a bit longer if you need it. thank you. >> let me just thank you and the ranking member velasquez and all of the members of the committee for engaging in the work and giving me this opportunity to testify before you today. it's nice to see you. i would like to open quickly with a review of fiscal year 2015. it was one of the most successful years in our agency's history. sba reached historic levels for small business lending under our flagship 781 during -- low on program in the gross approvals. this represents a 22% increase in the number of loan approvals prior to last year. a 23% increase in their dollar value compared to 2014. these games matter because the data shows that conventional small business lending has only returned to 84% of the pre- recessionary levels. building those gaps is the very purpose for which sba was created. we made notable progress in increasing the businesses

so we're always concerned about where the administration will go. we try to work with them every place we can. we've had some successes in working through some of these issues. we hope this last year if we can get the focus on what really benefits our society with job creation and environmental production, that we can find some common grounds to work on, but there's a lot of pending regulations out there that we can are unnecessary that we wish that wouldn't be pursuing so aggressive aggressively. >> hi, jack. good afternoon. amy with the wall street journal. i wanted to go back to carbon policy for a moment. you said a couple of minutes ago your members have various different positions on this issue. so i want to know what api's official position is on a carbon tax or some sort of price on carbon. i know you have a strong position on the rfs. you have a strong position on oil exports. as an official position, do you not have a position given the various positions of your member companies, or do you have one? >> we have a position. it's posted on our

schwartz: the obama administration transferred three guantanamo this week. they are expected to transfer over a dozen more by the end of the month i'm sure the president will talk about, in his state of the union, how he has pledged to shut down the facility. is there any way for the president to work with congress on this, with republicans? what happens if he tries to get an executive action out? rep. thornberry: i don't understand how he could use executive action to order guantanamo closed. there are a group of people that even demonstration acknowledges tha cannot be set loose because they are dangerous, cannot be tried because of the intelligence compromises that that would entail. the law that he signed explicitly prevents them from being brought here to the united states, as well as altering some .acility here to house them an executive order would expressly violate the law that he just signed, and i do not see how he does it. a campaign pledge to close guantanamo, he also said he would send congress a plan on how to do that. we have yet to receive the

in the previous administration, we americanized the war in vietnam. in this administration, we are vietnamizing the search for peace. >> now, he's talking about vietnam and southeast asia there, but what does this mean broadly in the context of american cold war policy during the nixon administration? >> i mean, i can almost hear the shah saying exactly those words. he would frequently tell nixon that unlike many other countries, you know, we don't want to fight until the last american, you know. look, the nixon doctrine was part of a comprehensive strategy. it was one half of the strategy, the other half being detente, the goal of the administration was to redirect american resources and attention away from what they perceived as needless engagements, unnecessary commitments towards the issues that mattered, which they -- by which they really meant relations between the great powers, china and the soviet union and the united states. so, how to achieve that? well, the united states would have to pick and choose where in the world it confronted the sovi

this is the obama administration's revised immigration policy. low adults to stay here longer if they're here illegally but they have children who are u.s. citizens. and, secondly, it would expand the program that allows young people who came here as children to stay in the country longer. now, that was immediately challenged by texas and 25 other state. their main argument was that the new policy should have gone through the period of public notice and comment and the government's failure to do that was illegaland granting people who stay here longer driver's licenses, the judge put it on hold. the federal appeals court declined to take that hold away. so now the obama administration has come to the supreme court. now, here is the calendar. it's probably going to be argued in april and the decision would come in june. so if, for example, the supreme court were to rule in the obama administration's favor, then the president could begin to put this into effect in his last days in office here, the end of 2016. if the government loses here, then it's

we had three former officials in the obama administration all testify. all said isis is a strategic and lethal threat to the united states, not hot air, and we need to be doing much more, especially to reduce their caliphate because towns will come and go in iraq and syria, but they are growing in other countries, libya, afghanistan among them. so we do have to have special operations people much more restrictive -- i mean much more vigorous air campaign. one note came out in our testimony yesterday. the early days of the afghanistan campaign after 9/11 had roughly eight times the number of aircraft that we have in iraq and syria now. just to kind of give you a femafeel for the different level of effort. we need to clearly be more serious about it. all the rules of engagement are handicapping the efforts we are making and as a result of that, many of our allies, who want to do more, who are able to do more, don't trust that the u.s. is going to lead, so they're holding back. as you know, king abdull ah has been in town for the past few days and met with o

on from the bush administration. i'm foreign service. i'm not a partisan person, and there was a lot of good that the bush administration had done to -- if i can put it this way -- dig it -- climb out of the hole it dug for itself earlier. and we built on that. so, this is, although politically it doesn't seem so, it is, in fact, bipartisan. though, it's hard to get anybody to admit to that. i'll hold to that position, and i ought to know. i was in the -- i remember in the bush administration when people fairly senior that the damage the existence of guantanamo was doing far outweighed the damage that could be done by daetainees returning to the fight which is a fascinating observation by people in the bush administration who then in the special -- especially in the second term wanted to close it. there are many things wrong with guantanamo. it is not wrong in my view to hold people at prisoners of war and pick them up on the battlefield. that's recognized. that has legitimacy. but guantanamo is not set up that way. i

ryan: the obama administration? thinkingase voters are a poverty program, we're talking about trillions of dollars. sen. ryan: the status quo of the obama administration believes that measuring success in the war on poverty as spending more money and having washington dictate solutions. we reject that premise. we disagree with that. so, we believe the more efficient way of combating poverty is to go to the root cause. we need to break the cycle of party. that means take our principles and apply them to this problem. what are our principles." -- what are our principles? we believe in communities. we believe in federalism. welfare is a perfect example. work works. local communities work. washington does not work. we will take those principles we have and apply them to the biggest problems in america. people living in poverty and the lack of opportunity and upward mobility. we believe that is where principles are needed. it is very different than where the administration thinks we should go. >> i know you are a policy g

as if the obama administration is the only administration that has promulgated rules of conduct. certainly we have had rules associated with the unveiling of the very successful affordable care act. a lot of rules put into place to prevent insurance companies from taking advantage of people. pre-existing conditions are outlawed. all of these are lady bulldog igses -- regulations that are associated with the affordable care act. parents being able to keep their kids on insurance up to the age of 26. no discrimination between men and women. those were rules that have stimulated jobs in america because 22 million people who did not have access to the health care system now have access to it. more jobs have arisen because of that. and that's a direct result of regulations. same thing with dodd frank which protects people from wall street overreach. those rules have created opportunities for small businesses to come in and start creating real jobs in america. so rules are good for our society. this legislation cuts that ability to create wealth for everyone else. so i would ask that th

or the administration has tilted towards iran. what that means is that they are less likely to take our counsel. so, when we give advice you, for example, the iranian forces were involved in helping orchestrate the takeover in yemen. of the shia militia there and a decision was made to put together an arab force to go into yemen and try to push the iranian out. and you'll yoel notice we were not included in those discussions. egypt, saudi arabia, other countries in the region are increasingly making decisions. on their own. without our counsel and i think part of that is they now lack the trust in the judgment of the administration. with respect to anything dealing with iran and the other con quenss of this, by the way, is it makes it harder for us to get solutions to other problems when this sectarian, when sunni and shia begin to separate. because of the consequences again. of actions where had the administration originally in 2008,i in guess it was, 2008, w the iranian green revolution. had we led then, we might have a different

now, some of the calls we have made in the last few years that disagreed with the administration proposals, things such as retaining an aircraft carrier, not retiring the a10, keeping both the u2 and the global hawk when we have a severe isr shortage. those things in hindsight looked pretty good. today, we have to make those judgment calls in a very constrained budget environment and in the most complex, difficult national security environment the country has ever faced. just think for a moment about the headlines of the last couple weeks or so. escalating tensions in the middle east between saudi and arabia lead to a greater chance, at least, of sectarian war. north korea tests another nuclear device while continuing to advance its missile programs. reports indicate russia took down the power grid in part of the ukraine over the holidays. a british film crew comes back from raqqa with evidence that isis is vigorously pursuing chemical weapons, heat seeking missiles and remotely piloted-- remotely controlled vehicles. more evidence comes out about isis operatives who are already in the uni

the administrative conference, mr. chairman, of the united states, reports that agencies have identified, and i quote, tens of billions of dollars of cost savings and tens of millions of hours of reduced paperwork and reporting requirements through modification of existing regulations because of those reviews. -- reviews already in place. the department of labor, for example, modified its chemical hazard labeling requirement, reducing costs to industry by $2.5 billion over the last five years. i'm particularly troubled by the bill's creation of a cut-go scheme, which seems to deceptively appealing -- seems deceptively appealing. that's plan in which agencies would be required to eliminate an existing regulation before they could possibly promulgate a new one. that forces agencies into an arbitrary and untenable position of having to choose between preserving existing public health and safety protections or moving to protect new threats against new threats -- new threats, against new threats. the bill provides no safe ha

next administration. >> we can't forget this started because of the obama administration with valley jarrod leak the drip, drip. maybe email is new to some people, but being secretary of state is not. handling classified information and documents are not. particularly when she told her staff to remove those headers. she is responsible. she should be held accountable and she did violate the law. charles: if you tell someone on your staff, fax this over to me and just remove the top. >> the cover-up is sometimes worse than the offense of the crime. that's what's going to get her in trouble if she gets in trouble for this. if you try to cover something up it makes you look and appear you are trying to be co-conspirators in some type of shady deal. charles: there are hundreds of f.b.i. agents on this case, the obama administration has been pushing it. valley jared has been pushing it. they areletting it move ahead. >> they have to -- they are letting it move ahead. they have to look as the it, vet to it see if charges are relevant and i don't see them. charles: i want to bring in ed henr

it was one of the most successful years in our administration's history. under our flagship guarantee program extending a whopping $23.5 billion in gross approvals. this represents a 22% increase in the number of loan approvals to prior last year. a 23% increase in their dollar value compared to 2014. these gains matter because fda data shows that conventional small business lending has only returned to 84% of pre-recess n pre-recessionary levels. filling those gaps in the marketplace was the very purpose for which sba was created. we made notable progress giving loans to businesses with the greatest accessible capital. the dollar value of our loans was up year on year, 23% to women, 23% to minorities and 103% to veterans. our number of loan approvals was up by 29% -- again, i just said that. these successes would not be possible except for the swift work of your committee. due to our record-breaking year, sba rose up to our statutory lending cap 60 days before the end of our fiscal year. at the urging of our stake holders, in less than a week -- i want to

this is coming from the administration. a lot of this is response. hen you're stuck in a paralysis, how do we handle it and address it to the american people. so this is the most acceptable way. and when you're dealing with entities, particularly the iranian, they know how to deal with it. they know how to get the message out. when we talk about martyrdom information, the timing of it and everything is well thought out. i do not want to say, we need another government department to handle this but i think we need a more foresight from this. however they -- how are they presenting it, or should we just roll with it? that is not the best idea. host: that is something that mike work don -- worked on. how the government counters the message. what is the way to take down --level of secretary and secretary and discourse. or the islamic state. mike: i don't think there is any way to avoid it, but i do not think we should base are onrting -- base our strategy it. you have to be aware of the issues. if you do not, you will make bad policy. what we are doing ri

the administration and particularly secretary sox has been vocal over the past year. as of yesterday, the draft has been moved over to omb. we accelerated that. we are moving through the review process because the administration is very keen to accelerate the innovation that could take place in that arena. also, i think everybody has mentioned ces. it is clearly a playground of innovation. there's all kinds of exciting doodad that you could either. it is not hard if you walk the floor and very clearly see that there are dozens -- many, many people working on automation, working on mobility connection, but also working on trans eyes. for instance, one example they released an aftermarket dsrc at ces this year. that will have tremendous impact on increasing the timeline of which we see the deployment of this technology. i also wanted to mention gm. we said 2017 a couple times, but 2017 -- it is 2016 already. that is a seriously think about when the model cars come out. they are planning to have them in cars and showrooms this year by the end of the year. we are moving f

but the white house said today the administration is confident the high court will rule in its favor. >> the kinds of executive actions that the president took a little over a year ago now to try to bring some much needed reforms, and greater accountability to our broken immigration system, were clearly consistent with the precedent established by other presidents, and clearly within the confines of his authority as president of the united states. >> woodruff: but that is the issue that 26 states dispute. texas is one of those states, and its attorney general, ken paxton, said today in a statement, "there are limits to the president's authority, and those limits enacted by congress were exceeded when the president unilaterally sought to grant lawful presence to more than four million unauthorized aliens who are in this country unlawfully." for more on the case, we turn to our regular, marcia coyle of "the national law journal." and marcia, welcome. >> thank you. >> woodruff: so some background first. this older the president made has been challenged almost from the very beginning, has

in your review of the sba, the small business administration, you've listed a whole range of deficiencies, areas with the sba has fallen short, just not cutting it. the one that worries me the most is in the area of i.t. security. first of all, the information that they keep on individuals and o small businesses can be pretty sensitive information, is that right? information you might not want a rival business or your neighbors or the chinese government to have access to. would you agree with that and would you like to comment? >> chairman chabot, you raised a very good point. one of the things i just want to say procedurally, that when you take such an extensive operational view of an agency like this, we certainly partnered with sba's office of inspector general, and we greatly appreciate the interactions we had. ngc in our report that we refer to the igs work quite liberally and some of the issues raised. the issue of i.t. security is one where we relied and we reported on the igs findings. basically there are issues identified by the ig that require, require attention but it's a very

we certainly know less than we did at the beginning of the obama administration. now part of the reason is the evolution of technology. part of the reason is the leaks that have told everybody, including our adversaries, what we do and how we do it. but part of the reason is because of the ways we tie our own hands at collecting the information we need for the country's security. for example, p.p.d. 28, presidential decision 28 gives foreign intelligence targets basically the same rights that american citizens have. overriding the instructions that the i.c. has gotten from every other president since ronald reagan. now we are asking more of our intelligence professionals than we have ever asked of them before yet we ask them to operate with one hand tied behind their back. that makes the country more vulnerable. finally, i mentioned earlier that it's unlikely, in my opinion, that the obama administration will do anything other this coming year that will significantly improve the perilous situation we find around the world. i do not mean to disparage the many good p

torture and abuse at guantanamo under the bush administration. carol: we're talking about the abuse by association at abu ghraib that was described as gitmotizing. sharyl: president obama made closing gitmo his first promise as chief executive. pres. obama: in this first executive order we are signing, guantanamo will be closed no later than one year by now. sharyl: congress responded in 2010 by prohibiting prisoner transfers to the u.s. that led tnew controversies with the obama administration leasing detainees to other countries. president obama: i told bob and jannie that their son bowe is coming home. as part of this transfer, the united states is transferring five detainees from guantanamo. sharyl: in 2014, the white house made a secret deal to trade so-called high value talan prisoners for alleged u.s. military deserter sgt. bowe the obama administration failed to provide congress the required notice, saying it had to act quickly. part of the argument to close guantanamo bay is its enormous cost. the prison facilities built to hold hundreds

think this sis hundred% within the administration but within the administration there are certainly people who care about the injustice represented by guantanamo the dangers it poses to america's national security. i do think that there are clearly parts of the administration that don't hold that point of view. i think we reached the point where prisoners are being released, where there is a push to close the prison, which suggests there are significant forces within the administration who want to make that happen before he leaves office. so the situation that we have today is that there are 103 men in guantanamo, and an announcement was made today that another prisoner has been released. of those 103 men, 44 of them have been told that they can leave the prison. 35 of those men were approved for release from the prison by the guantanamo review task force that president obama established when he took office. so that was a high-level interagency review process. these guys met once a week. they spent time looking at the cases of the men to decide whether they should approve them for re

cummings: the obama administration -- which i believe will go down in history as one of the most transparent administrations to date. sharyl: he calls the report "erroneous," "highly partisan," and "incomplete." rep. cummings: from 2009-2014, the overall number of foia requests submitted to fed agencies increased by 28% with new records set in each of the past 4 years. sharyl: still, cummings agrees foia reform is needed. rep. cummings: congress must give these agencies more resources. sharyl: this week, the house voted on a bill that he co-sponsored to strengthen foia law. >> the bill is passed. without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. sharyl: the bipartisan bill would require government agencies to update regulations, post frequently requested information online, and release all information not covered by years. rep. issa: we regularly use the freedom of information act and we regularly find ourselves frustrated. sharyl: republican darrell issa of california co-sponsored the ia bill. rep. issa: no longer after this bill is signed into law will an administration - r

when you heard from the administration, not trying to pick up the apartment and its duration, the bush administration would've been exactly the same. there is a tendency to want to protect. there is a natural inclination you can see that. that is going to be embarrassing. that is not the way our government works. the united states of america are different than everybody else. we do open up our books. it is the peoples business. people are paying for it not to have access to the information. certain things you shouldn't be, certain personnel files. i get that. darrell issa and elijah cummings will come to the fore sooner rather than later that narrow some of the successions. and then we have a report that will find a lot of sunshine on how broken the system is. the state department in my view is probably the worst status. we've got to figure out a way to actually make this thing work. some agencies pretty good, but most of them are really bad. 40% of the requests are homeland security and their backlog is just -- i mean, just unbelievable. it needs fixing and we will issue a report on m