tv Key Capitol Hill Hearings CSPAN August 8, 2015 2:00am-4:01am EDT
we engaged and in pursuit of an opportunity to support the deal but it did not turn out that way. but that would account for the disappointment that i expressed. . . expressed. >> and there is a suggestion that maybe the president will be working during his vacation. >> was my intent to convey to you that there would not be much time spent on making phone calls but i certainly went rule out that he would make some calls. that would have been true regardless of the timing or the
outcome of senator schumer. >> obviously pres. obama's not on the ballot, but his policy is under attack. does it seem at all with the what the republican essay and the reason why the middle east is such a mess now but they're saying because we president obama ordered troops out of iraq, that's why, can you at least, and on that? >> i think it doesn't hurt to illustrate the starkly different approaches by democrats and the president obama. president obama has made clear that he does not see the scenario where u.s. military personnel will be engaged in
combat operation in iraq or syria. i know know many republicans on the stage last night who either on the stage or previously articulated their support for a strategy that would include significant commitment of u.s. boots on the ground in iraq and syria. the president doesn't believe that would be the best way to advance national security in the united states. that's a disagreement we've had for a long time and ultimately the american people will have to use their own judgment about starting another war on the ground in the middle east. >> trouble start when president obama ordered the troops to start cycling down in iraq or didn't start before? >> i think what we been clear about is trace setting the genesis of the situation and
back in 2003. there is a sense of discussion that al qaeda in iraq, a canada was not in iraq until the invasion occurred. since then we have been dealing with the consequences of that invasion and the infiltration and propagation of the extremist forces in iraq. we are dealing with those consequences even today. >> on the iran deal the criticism over, and, and over was the united states got nothing. what did the united states get? >> well what the united states got out of this deal is something that republicans and even prime minister netanyahu has long said is the top priority, which is verifiably not allowing iran to obtain a nuclear weapon. it's something they all agreed that they had said. and this had said this is the
best way for us to accomplish that goal. >> on immigration, is there a change in policy, it says when you read it it sounds as though dhs is standing changing its policy on the detention center. >> we discussed yesterday that this is something the administration and president has long acknowledged that's a very difficult policy challenge. one that has been difficult to confront. for the details of the policy in the way it's described to the judge, i prefer the department of homeland security i want to inadvertently describe it at a different way, this is a challenging issue and one the administration takes serious.
>> and the response dhs says from a two-week period more than 60% of those at the detention center were released, was this because the white house is again changing policy? >> for those specific enforcement issues i defer to dhs. >> yesterday we saw the announcement that the u.s. had transferred the wife of a senior isis leader to i rocky custody, and the statement from the white house it says that she was put in the detention of an american, i want to know it they're saying she will not face u.s. charges
was there a policy decision not to more aggressively pursue that avenue? of trying those charges. >> i think there a couple of things that factor in here, the decision to transfer her was based on a unanimous, interagency decision, and that the transfer would be appropriate due to legal, situations. i there were many agencies consulted about this particular decision, the determination of the position has been conducted in full coronation with the government of iraq. both the united states and the iraqi government are supportive of this transfer. one thing i will add is that u.s. personnel did have an opportunity to interrogate her
for an extended period of time, to maximize the collection of available, and useful intelligence. she was married to a senior isil leader, who was killed in a special operations raid in c syria earlier this year. we do suspect that she is with a member of iselin played an important role in the isil terrace and we believe her and her husband are complicit in the captivity of the u.s. citizen. we also think they are complicit in another young woman who was rescued at the time of her capture. we have a firm believe that in the context of the iraqi criminal justice system that she will be held accountable.
>> given what you just laid out as their frustration or disappointment that now someone so complicit, and engaged in a fairly senior level of isil is outside the reach? >> again the decision to press charges in the u.s. court is made by prosecutors at the department of justice. that's a decision they would make, and they would be able to give you more of a next one nation on the decision that may. at the same time, the reason you have brought interagency consensus, that this was the right approach, is the united states has confidence that once i have will face justice in the iraq he justice system. >> and lastly you talked about
their review of a policy that we have undertaken, how is this communicated to the families? was there communication to the families in regards to the. >> yes it was communicated to ms. mueller's family mueller's family prior to this public announcement. >> i have a newly created. >> the i don't know exactly how that communication occurred but it was communicated to ms. mueller's family here in the united states before any public announcement of this decision was made. >> another question, she was captured in syria, she was living in syria why she sent to iraq question mike. >> she's an iraqi citizen. i would refer you to the iraqi criminal officials about that, obviously there's some reason to be skeptical of the syrian justice system at this point. for the charges she will face, and where they took place i
would do for you to the iraqi criminal justice system. but the reason why she was transferred is because she was a citizen of iraq. [inaudible] >> we been pretty worth right and candid about the significant challenges we face in trying to implement the training equip strategy, when it comes to recruiting, training, and supporting of moderate syrian opposition fighters. to take the fight to isil on the ground in syria. one of the most significant challenges, is conducting background checks, there is a priority place to making sure that those going through the training program and
receive significant equipment are not individuals who are prepared to use that training and the equipment against coalition forces. or other moderate. it's been a difficult challenge, as i mentioned yesterday the president has been briefed on the current state of this mission. i've often said the united states and the president and his team, is interested in working with our coalition to make sure we are constantly reviewing the policies we have in place and updating, improving and refining them when necessary to better accomplish our goal. >> for an update on the update on the equipment i do for you to the iraqi department.
[inaudible] any other areas that i could sites senator schumer has been supportive of other democrats in pursuit of the president agenda. there is no denying that with this agreement, difference of opinion that emerged overnight, is one that has existed between senator schumer and president obama for more than a decade. >> just one question in the report port said one american official had visited russia, the details of the visit was three days with president putin and
other officials so so make what the un security council so they asking for some type of investigation with the un. >> i'm not aware, i do for you to our mission at the united nations for information for any kind of request or making of the united nations. i would remind you that we have been very clear that we do not anticipate even the success implementation of this nuclear concern is is not going to change the behavior. >> if this is true this person was in the forefront of the accusation of the deal that actually he is being given more
money and we will have more opportunity to the middle east. >> when the people who are making the argument are wrong, the sanctions against mr. sue lonnie through the united nations will remain in place and will be a minute for ten years. the president has been clear that the united states sanctions against mr. sue will nami are affected by the deal because of his support for terrorism will keep the sanctions in place and were certainly mindful of his activity, and our level of concern about them has not changed. i will tell tell you our level of concern about his activity would be greater if he had access to a nuclear weapon. that's why were working so hard to prevent iran from obtaining one.
[inaudible] >> mark, has president obama ready to leave on vacation later today, would you say that that this is a vacation he really needs badly. >> i think it is true that those of you who have been closely following the president, would note that his schedule has been especially demanding in the last several weeks. i think you would also be quick to tell you that the last several weeks have been especially rewarding for him. it's included a historic trip to africa, it's included a completion of negotiation on iran from a tainting a nuclear weapon, it included after a
couple of snafus the passage of trade negotiation authority. which will hopefully allow the united states and other nations to complete a trade agreement, to say nothing of the supreme court rulings that once again upheld the constitutionality of the affordable care act, and affirmed the right for everyone in this country to marry who they love. it's been a rather rewarding, satisfying several weeks. the pace of those accomplishments and the pace of that progress has been rapid. >> i think he took a look at his schedule and realized that he would be able to fulfill all of
his immediate responsibilities at a decent hour today that would allow him to spend the night in martha's vineyard and get started on his vacation first thing tomorrow morning. i know the president is looking forward to spending some time with his family when he gets up there. >> so if you ever find out what he was talking about when, at the start of this au speech he said he said even presidents have trouble with toner. >> i think he there may have been a little bit a snafu about the backstage printer at american university. >> if it's not one thing it's another. [inaudible]
>> let me start by saying the united states condemns in the strongest terms last night's bombing in cabo which reportedly killed more than eight people. the latest report may be said 14 or 15, and there could be more and wounded as many as 400 civilians including women, and children. this attack represents the ever-growing problem between extremists and the people of afghanistan, it certainly shows the blatant disregard for human life on the part of those extremists. the fact is in recent years the afghan people have endured much, they are resilient, and are resilient even in the face of a brutal insurgency. we continue to believe, and king
continue to urge the taliban to keep pres. connie's call for reconciliation and make genuine peace with the afghan government. i would add that in terms of who's responsible for the attack i would do for to the government avast afghanistan. what is clear is there does appear to be an opening and we are hopeful that the taliban will take advantage of that opening and try to pursue a genuine peace with the effort dan government. the president connie has made clear that he would support that effort and hopefully those overtures will be reciprocated by the taliban. [inaudible]
i think it's both, let me explain why. you will recall when the sanctions were duly put in place, three or four years ago, the united states traveled around the world including to india, sat down with the indian government, and asked them to curtail the amount of iranian oil that they poured into the country. we acknowledged in the context of those discussions that this would be an economic sacrifice, that the the people of india and the economy of india would have to risk, but they agree to it saying it's something they're willing to do if it can advance our effort to prevent iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. in essence that was the agreement, like countries like
india had agreed they would take these steps, even at their own expense to try to reach this broader international. the good news is that agreement has been reached and it is in agreement that is supported by the international community. 99% of the world as the president has described it. that's why it would be so damaging for the standing up united states, for the united states congress to act unilaterally to kill the steel. no longer would countries like india, who have been making a substantial sacrifice over the years, have any interest or incentive to continue to enforce the sanctions against iran. there is no basis, there is no credible claim as to why they would be willing to do that. there is no denying, the significant negative impact of the united states credibility
ability to be isolated in this way. that's why pres. said if congressman for to kill the steel, or kill this agreement it would in fact yield a better deal for iran. because what we would see as iran we would get sanctions relief, they would be able to sell oil to india and get the proceeds for doing so. without having to reduce their nuclear stockpile by 98%, without having to put 13000 centrifuges in story, without having to got there plutonium reactor and without having to submit to the most intensive sanctions and inspections on their nuclear program. the question is whether or not the united states international communities going to get anything for it. that is ultimately the choice
before members of congress right now, it's why why we continue to be confident we will be able to build substantial support, at least in the democratic caucus. >> after the ministration is charge republicans with that presidents of port for something led republicans to oppose it, do you think with the iran deal essay the republican government would produce the same document would republicans oppose it as they did not now? >> opposes a good hypothetical, the first thing is there's no denying the fact that senior republicans in the united states congress appeared on television two days before the agreement was reached and announce, to announce their opposition to the
deal. senator mcconnell appeared on fox news sunday two days before the agreement was reached and proclaimed the deal quote a bad deal on quote. this is before it was reached or even an ounce. the question question is, why did he do that? does he have remarkable powers of clairvoyance? it's possible. it seems more likely that he is committed to the kinds of argument that he and other republicans made in 2003 that led up to the iraq war. that he's committed to this idea that is not diplomacy is not worth the effort, that were in the middle east is easy and we can easily work our will, and that opinions of some of our closest allies and partners in the world are not worth paying attention to. those are exactly the arguments that were made in the march to war in 2003, and these are exactly the kind of arguments we hear from her publicans including senator
mcconnell as they advocate against the deal. >> does the president think it's also a matter of him if someone else was negotiating, or his administration is negotiating the deal is what led to the bulk of the opposition? >> i think it's hard to tell there's a variety of motives that could be described here. the clearest one is again senator mcconnell is making the same argument that he made in 2003 and is the president's view that those arguments and the policy that resulted from those arguments did not of bands the interest of the united states in terms of going to iraq in 2003. he does not believe it would serve while the interest of united states if they were used to successfully kill an agreement that 99% of the world agrees with.% of the world agrees with. >> does the white house be a a multiplier effect from senior
democrats opposing this that perhaps they would sway others? >> not particularly, also a couple of things. the first there is us story and political, their carefully covering our words this week they did a story about the competing political pressures on senator schumer now that i'm embarrassed that i'm going to be nice to them, because of their diligence and reporting out that story they interviewed a couple of democratic united states senators to continue to be undecided at least publicly, on whether or not to support this agreement. both senator koester and mcallister were quoted in the story is same senator schumer's decision would have no impact on theirs. i think senator koester had hoped the reporter wouldn't tell
senator schumer that his opinion would have a factor. the other data i can point out to you is senator schumer is the senior senator from new york, the junior senator from new york also came out yesterday and she announced her support for the deal. since then senator schumer made his announcement, at least me semi- tally but as far as i can tell there's one democratic senator who has announced his opinion since then, i think there's a preponderance of evidence to indicate that democrats are going to make up their minds not a son senator schumer's conclusion but based on their own conclusion on the merits of this agreement. including a strategy to prevent iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. were going to continue to feel confident.
>> how engaged what you say is the president in the republican primary process? do you think one of these folks might meet him on inauguration day, is he curious to see what the debate happens #speemac he's certainly following the terms of the debate, just not in real time. so the president is aware of the broader political debate that's ongoing, on confidence he will be more than just a casual observer at 16 months or so before election day is 15 minutes. there have been a couple of occasions where he has been act directly about the outrageous claims of those who are running to replace him, at least one or two occasions he has shied away from responding.
>> do you think senator schumer's influence. [inaudible] >> it's hard to measure exactly, what kind of influence he has on these matters. he clearly is someone very focused on the issue but he's also somebody who's arrived at a sharply different conclusion than the president has. i don't think any of you including all of you has had an opportunity to interact with the president when he is talking about this issue. i think it's hard to quantify, we continue to be confident that the vast majority of democrats in the united states congress will make a decision based on their own conclusion not on senator schumer's. >> what will be going on during this period in early september to start voting on this and even
though you could still feasibly lose it so it's a strategy? >> as we talked about yesterday, the steel does not rate quire congressional approval but there is no doubt that congress can play the spoiler here. we are continuing to be confident of our ability to prevent that from happening. but we certainly don't take any of these folks for granted. while congress was in session you saw senior members of the national security team spending a lot of time on capital hill, and classified settings, and public meetings and even testifying under oath. i think when congress is out of session there be a number of private conversations that occur between members of congress and
the national security team and i'm confident when the president returns to the white house in a few weeks he also will reengage in that effort, and will also be making a number of calls and having conversations. >> a person close to the decision said this announcement from schumer but the white house leaked it last night deliberately because it would get buried with all the attention on the republican debate. did the white house leak this? >> no, i'm not sure who thought leaking it on thursday night would bury it, anyone his been in this business for a few days would understand that announcing this on 4:00 o'clock on a friday, particularly a friday before the president and i assume many of you are prepared
to go on vacation would have been a more effective strategy. >> the president did not spend his leisure time last night watching the debate, perhaps jon stewart? >> i don't know if he watched jon stewart's final show, it definitely started too late for me to stay up and watch it. hopefully i'll be. hopefully i'll be a catch up over the weekend. >> because the president did an interview that will air on sunday i wanted to follow up on senator schumer does the president believe schumer is going to vote against the iran deal. >> ii think what he said in his interview does directly apply in this case. that the concerns he has with the republican conference as
they announce their opposition to the agreement before the agreement was even announced, before it was even reached, before it was even available for members of congress to read. that's an indication of their ideological opposition to this deal. hardliners in i ron are also ideologically opposed. i also point out the other way in which republicans and hardliners in iran were writing us a letter to the supreme leader in iran, tracking arguments trying to convince the supreme leader of iran not to a engage in the agreement. that's the essence of the president's case. senator schumer reached a conclusion but the essence of our disagreement is vigorous but it's different.
schumer is advocating an approach to foreign up policy that minimizes success and relies far too much on the ability of the united states to unilaterally impose our will through force if necessary on a sovereign middle eastern country. that's what what schumer indicated in 2003, the president does not believe that served well the interest of the united states in 2003 and he doesn't believe it serves the interest of the united states now. >> even though the united states is disappointed in schumer, there is a distinction between him and center of o'connell, is that o'connell expressed his
views in july and schumer expresses views in august 7. >> what i'm saying is the timing of these announcements, mcconnell announced his opposition to the deal, he referred to it as a bad deal before it was even reached. while we are still sitting on the negotiating table in vienna. barbie fourth and agreement was released and announce, that's an indication that he was ideologically opposed to this the same way that people in iran were opposed to it. >> you're saying that prides senator schumer had an open minds about this. >> what i'm saying is that schumer at least, read the agreement, talk to the experts involved in negotiating, spent time talking to experts to understand the nuclear basis and some of the conclusions reached
by her negotiators, that at least demonstrates an argument to the other side. given his well-known view on a range of foreign policy issues, the result is not particularly surprising. >> the debate last night had a viewership of like 60 million people is the president concerned that the viewership last night will in some way overtake his own appeal later in the week while members are at home, while members have gone home. >> know the present is not worried about that. >> to follow up on the schumer
did he indicate he was going to vote to both override the president's veto? >> i don't know the details of the information is transmitted from schumer's office to the white house, so i do for you to schumer's office for detailed explanation of if you would override a presidential veto. >> you are pragmatic yesterday when you asked about does the number matter, you said it it's really congress who screwed it up. when democratic senators are considering their literary leadership should they consider the vote to disapprove and the vote to override or, is your
pragmatism should it lead into the democratic senate. >> ultimately they'll decide on the criteria that they set. i don't have any advice. i would protect and suspect that they will apply that test as they consider their vote for the next democratic leader. >> you're saying the white house remains pragmatic about the utility of the vote and unloading it is not necessarily as important as. >> my point is i think democrats in the senate will make up their own minds and apply their own criteria in terms of who and how they choose the next leader, i merely suspect that many of them included in their criteria the voting record of those who say they want to leave the caucus. ultimately that's up to them to decide, maybe some of them won't, it's their own decision to make.
>> in terms of in terms of the best way for congress neither poverty party who wants to support the deal we both encourage them strongly, and is not a close call in terms of making the decision, to and certainly oppose an effort to override the presidential veto if that disapproval does pass. >> on a geo dp debate on the gop debate all 17 pone minutes oppose same-sex marriage.
>> i think it's a hard thing to say so much of the progress that has been made is in progress that a substantial number of americans have come around to support. i think it speaks to not just the critically important political progress that has been made in this country on some of these issues, but in some ways i think it's a persuasive argument that at least as important as that, is the social progress that has been made in communities large and small across the countries. discussions of these issues are taking place outside the context of any political election or partisan debate, i think it's my view, at least some of that social progress would not have been possible without some political leadership and that is why the president is justifiably
proud of his record. the real power behind this change in the views of so many americans, as we perfect our union, is the power of the american people. the significant change we have seen in a relatively short period of time. [inaudible] >> again i think this is my answer i think some of the social progress that has been made can be attributed to some political leadership, including political leadership from the president of the united states.
there is no doubt we would have liked to seen congress take some of the steps that the president has been forced to take on his own, to try to make our country more just and fair. congress has resisted, ultimately those voters who prioritize the issues, i'm confident will look carefully at the views and records of those running for president because there's no denying the kind of authority they could yield sitting in the oval office on these issues. >> i want to follow up regarding the transfer of the eye bracket detainee, you said the record the obama administration has of capturing and building a case, trying terrorist suspects in the u.s. courts, what part of the
decision because there is insufficient evidence so was there insufficient evidence that would have either held up in the u.s. court, is that part of the reasoning or is it additionally because the iraqi government opposed given the provisions in their own constitution that they can hand over their citizens and also why was she given to the kurds instead of the iraqi authorities? >> there is a lot there, let me see if i can get there. in terms of why she will put through the kurdish system while we can't guarantee a particular result, we do have a firm belief that she will be held accountable for her crimes and
the united states and its ready to cooperate with the authorities in iraq to support her prosecution and insist that justice is served. the other relevant facts is that she has been deep tamed and held for the last few months and in the course of that detention we worked closely with the government and the criminal justice authority there, one of the other reasons this makes sense, in terms of having her go through the kurdish criminal justice system relates to the location of potential witnesses. who would take part in these proceedings. i'm not aware of any concern the department of justice expressed about the weakness of their case, you can go speak to them or directly about this.
i think you could conclude that we believe this is the best course of action, because as i referred to earlier, this is the conclusion of the intelligence community, certainly our national security and our law enforcement officials, this is the best position and this is the conclusion we reached in agreement with iraq he officials as well. >> what did baghdad have for her? >> the central government and baghdad certainly agreed. >> tomorrow is the year anniversary of the military operation against the islamic state you mentioned earlier that expanded military options in syria might be counterproductive to efforts to come to a political transition there's been some hesitance to discuss what authority the u.s. might have when it comes to protecting the fighters against anyone
whether it's isis, is that reluctance to impart to see in that discussion as counterproductive? >> know i have been willing the contents of this briefing earlier this week to discuss legal justification that our partners have already taken and and trained and equipped soldiers that are fighting iceland syria. the administration has concluded that is appropriate under the 2001 for united states and our coalition partner to take strikes against extremists that are threatening u.s. or coalition trained syrian forces that are operating on the ground against isil. that the polities policy decision that has been made.
>> >> and is ready to welcome the prime minister next month. they will be here it new york. has he been invited by obama before he leaves? >> cry of not aware of any planned visit from the prime minister to the white house in conjunction with his travel through the united states or the u.n. general assembly.
>> tomorrow members of march from the lincoln memorial. bin there will be congressman there to make a statement. any word from the president? because they're asking. >> win this tragic event originally occurred, of we express our profound sorrow at the loss of life and offer our sincere condolences to the families of those who had loved ones in the attack. linkedin would remind you this administration has made
counter violence and extremism like we saw in wisconsin, a top priority. this kind of extremism and this administration is determined to work with elected officials and law enforcement and community leaders across the country to counter it. this is the challenge and risk the administration doesn't take lightly as they continue 24-hour is a day seven days a week. with that i hope all of you will get a chance to take up a little vacation while the president is on vacation. so we will not be convening in the briefings will he is out. you have a couple weeks off.
branch of stratification. philipalso here with bumps from the washington post. first let's go to a specific number for you tom. we know that elections are part of the report. we know that congressional election turnout is 40%. tell us more. time you are the correct. beginning in the 1970's the turnout rate was 48.9% across the entirety of the congressional district. time ishave found over , we unpacked that low turnout number. that is the focus of the report. why do you think that is
the case? guest: there are a lot of reasons. correlationigh between how this is going and how people are so secure in their lives. most voters tend to vote more often. they have a stable home and there are a lot of reasons contributing to what they want more. the financial also seent, we have these shifting over time as well. , ite's less engagement makes them less interested in going out and getting into the polls. host: let's get the phone numbers on the screen. do you vote? why or why not. on the bottom of the screen will have several numbers. if you are between the numbers ,f 18 and 24 call 202-748-8000
if you are in the middle age call 202-748-8001 if you are .lder than 64 call 202-748-8002 if you set up the numbers like that it is because studies that are put together tell us more about it. we did get a lower turnout rate analysis. it goes by age and race. what we have found is that over the course of the time older americans tend to vote more. we found that older people vote more than younger or middle-aged. that has happened across the entire united states. host: the electorate has grown increasingly diverse. guest: in some ways that just mirrors the population as a whole. one part of the analysis shows what part -- what does
electorate look like ecco -- he ecco --? hispanic origin, let's get your perspective. guest: we jumped the gun a little bit like talk about age. there is actually a fast-moving curve. we are working with trading purposes. if you look at the curve over time it looks like this. it drops off very quickly and slowly climbs back up. we are seeing a correlation there. the gun, i jumped the gun by talking about it. nobody has ever done a good job of convincing voters that it is worth thinking that time in the go out and get the polls. it is a tough case to make when
you are working two jobs and just move. all these factors come into play. consistently not been able to make the case that is worth their time. host: how much do we know? guest: the race component is very interesting. we still see that there is stratification by race and ethnicity. whites still tend to vote and a anher rate, blacks vote at even level, and hispanics vote at much lower levels. those are all interesting. again, a lot of this is loosely correlated. your job is to bury statistically accurate, mine is not. guest: when you look at the standing, they tend to be younger than white people. there is age overlap as well.
as the hispanic population ages do they show the same development. guest: the other thing that looks most interesting is the fact that the electorate was diverse in 2014. the results suggest that it was not a very diverse electorate, because everybody was moving so handily despite that diverse electorate. a lot of people see it as sort of a high water mark. we are not in the midterm elections. guest: we have done is reports for presidential. staffs the first time our showed that the voting of blacks and hispanics was higher than white non-hispanics. >> we had highly engaged electorates.
we had this current congressional electorate. ofhink that is an indication regardless of the specific election, there could be a diverse selection across cycles. guest: particularly next year, one of the reason we have whites not voting was because we had the first african-american. it'll be fascinating to watch in 2016 how it works against the population of nonwhite voters. one of the headlines to one of the stories is that the electorate in 2014 was as diverse as 2008. that is remarkable. we will pick up the phone's for our two guests. again, we are blind by age. ray and is calling between the age of 18 and 34. good morning. are you there? i think they hung up. from what state?
can you hear us? caller: yes. host: calling from maryland between the ages of 35 and 44. what kind of questions do you have? caller: the question i have is its i'm calling as a hispanic. he said there was an increase in the turnout of whites. thinks tell us why he what he thinks is driving that. benefit, can the you tell us what is dealing with the growth and the turnout. , what are some of the
interests in stopping minorities from voting. host: thank you. the question is what is driving minority voter turnout? guest: i think the senses is a thing we are really good at as we document what happens. it seems like i would know somebody who could answer that. institute thehe question is we cannot tell you for certain, to be totally fair. is that the population itself has grown more diverse. thingsme one of the we're not really touched on is what we are seeing happen now with the electorate is really what we expected to happen long-term with the debate. the base will grow increasingly hispanic. absolutely that
this population becomes more hispanic it is more popular than there was in the past. there are more voters in the population. other than that it is hard to determine what leads to voter turnout. on a grandelection scale, we have a national election. it's hard to know what gets people to polls and what does not. it is hard to say. host: let's go to arizona. , -- you esterday host: what would like to say? caller: i would like to say go donald trump. he is right out there. he cannot be bought. he is not a politician. let me jump in, we do get the point. that is our last segment.
we are now talking about voter turnout. voter turnout, it is the lowest it has been since 1978. would you like to speak about that? caller: yes. i will turn out. i would like to speak about that , because i think all of the people need to turn out. people thatack the will save our country. thank you. host: thank you. what else would you like to add about the senior group? have: the real question we talked a lot about is the consistency of older americans voting. also, we are talking about the racial future of the country. i think the real question is that as this large group of hispanics age, will they be consistent like older americans currently are? i think that is a very fundamental question as we move forward.
that is voting habitual. it becomes a habit. i think the row question is that does this new demographic shift to the same kind of voting. host: is there an anecdote that tells you what that might be? we are early in the trend. look at a map of the country, and you look at ethnicity, and age. it stands out. say that one of the reasons that the republican party is pulling its hair out with donald trump is that they are worrying about what will happen with these bennett vote. rocket himself to the that was the immigration issue. it had him high in the polls. but from the republican party standpoint they too want to know what will happen to the hispanic voters. they know it will be an increasing part of the electorate.
that is why donald trump stresses them out. host: from florida, calling from the line from 45 to 65. caller: good morning. i just want to say, it isn't there a little bit of an over emphasis on the classification of voters then on the substantial issues that affect this country. might notike people be going to the polls because the issues are complex, they don't understand it. maybe they don't have the level of education. it seems like there might not be enough emphasis on the real issues that people need to really think about as they move to the polls. more interest is paid in popular rather than focusing on the boring, the nerdy, although the very important issues that
affect our lives in the country. on ethnicity,ced and groups and everything else like that rather than on the overall problems that we are all facing. host: who wants to take that you go --? guest: this is about the demographic shift. it is kind of hard to not talk about ethnicity and race. obviously, it is hard to make the case about why a board policy issue should not be boring. politicians have to make that case. they can get people energized. it is kind of hard to answer on that. know a file clerk wants to do women felt more than men? guest: in this specific report we limited the analysis to age and race. that is an old finding in political science. generally found to be the
same, except there was a big gender gap. we take the 80's for granted. host: why? what is the speculation? about why women are voting more than men. guest: there is an engagement gap. maybe philip does. guest: i do not know. i have not seen a lot of research done. host: what are the most prevalent reasons people give for not voting? guest: there is a great report, i do not know who it was. it was very basic. in the report we took the responses we typically get from voters is that they say they do not like the candidates or politics. they might be disenfranchised with policy issues. also, people are just too busy. they do not have time. guest: i think also that probably a lot of people who did not find time or forgot about it
would say they were not inspired by candidate. seeing iswe are alternative methods becoming more common. i think you'll see perhaps those excuses change. early, i think it being too busy is less of a reason. we did address that in the report. wet: karen writes i think make more impact in local elections. as you see if your people participate in those. 18-34 years old. from massachusetts. good morning. well, the reason i'm calling is that i am voting because of the first amendment. the fourth amendment and the 14th amendment. i believe in equal rights. believe that social justice will be the issue of the next election. , imy generation gets older
think that is definitely something that will be one of the most important issues over time. that is why people will start voting, especially hispanics. are notl like they wanted. especially by one party. with marco rubio and ted cruz, they look hispanic. they are not representing our views or our beliefs. education, and giving everyone a better life. that is why i am voting, that is why i have always voted. this is the first time i have called. host: did you say this is the first time your voting? caller: i have voted before. host: you will continue to do hat yet go --? what do you make of what you have heard. the challenging thing
with young people seems to get them out that first time. then voted becomes sort of a habit and then you do it consistently. the challenge for anybody in office, how do you engage young people. , especially on the immigration issue those will be one thing that resonate more. in 2014 older hispanics did turn out. as you get older you become more engaged. aaron calling in. do you vote? caller: thank you. , the issuesnnial
that matter to me are issues that matter to my generation. we are finding that jobs are not there. the one candidate that i think that does talk about issues that matter to me is the candidate bernie sanders. he talks about income inequality. he talks about progressive taxation. we talk about education
competing in the 21st century. he talks about disasters. he is one who means the most to me. he means the most to millennial's. host: what do you think it is that moves you? you talk about these issues that get you to go up and move out. when there might be other folks your age, or maybe younger who are not motivated to go out. what is it that gets you out? the pressure that gets me out is that it does influence my life. like i said, all of these policies and increasing pressure on our generation to influence politics bernie sanders goes down. withw that in the 1930's the greatest generation. they rebuilt america. and if you read generational theory, we are going back through that cycle with the millennial's. host: thank you. darren sees it not just as an
issue that -- do you want to speak to that? guest: not to go back to these politics that overlie all of this. it is kind of hard not to. it is hard for officials to make the case that what they're doing -- as we look at debates. they are going in part because it is things that are on television. it keeps attention on the issues. for the gentleman that is called an he is talking about the issues, but if you're not paying attention to them is hard to get people involved. host: this says many you say they have not voted because they do not understand the issues. sadly, the specs a very susceptible to political advertising. focus on younger
folks, what have you learned in the research institute. guest: it is a pretty straight up demographic survey. guest: a lot of the thing is stuff so anecdotal. overlies all this is that people are trying to make the case about why what they are doing is right in the people are wrong. i do not know it is a case that young people are more susceptible and that is why they do not vote. i think it is that it is hard when you are young, to the gentleman's point that is called in, that he has all of the student debt and he is trying to figure out where he will live. there is as big study that came out that said more millennial's live at home, despite the fact that the economy is improving that has to do it that fact that rents are high, job quality is down. there are all of these overline issues.
saying that things are not taking the time to learn about issues, i think that is sort of unfair. that is not because the voter's and got an vote. it is because of all these different campaign issues. host: back to where we are going. guest: what we call is turning method is something not happening on election day. what we found is that since 1996, when we started talking about alternative methods, we saw an increase. there is no reason to think it will not grow the future.
if more states move that direction, if more states adopt policy then we expect to see it go up. host: do we apply this to him certain age groups? guest: the big question here is that there is a trend moving we are seeing an effort to curtail, and constrain early voting hours with the argument that this is a protection method. it is a case that there is very little impersonal election ballot absentee voter fraud. it is part of the issue. but the whole thing comes back to the rights. you see that there are some places where you see in the polls that they consistently get
early voting. those ballots are overwhelmingly democratic. and that makes the republicans nervous. we are seeing a political fight about access to early voting and access to the ballot. i do not think that will go anywhere over the short term. it will be interesting to see how those trends have increased. guest: we found that hispanics actually employed a lot of alternative methods, more so than whites or blacks. i can cross that several different times. the exception for blacks is that they do alternative methods other than the democratic breakdowns. but the 2008 and 2012 elections show that increase. host: tom has been waiting from oklahoma. thank you for explaining that. you are on the phone. go ahead. caller: thank you.
ok, i do not vote. i have not voted. but if donald trump gets in there i will vote for him. i like donald trump -- i do not like donald trump, i think he's aired it. but these politicians have been trying to balance the budget for years and years and cannot seem to do it. they need a businessman in there. i think not a career politician. host: what do you think that the turnout discussion? by thisspecial increase congressional number. the number is 41.9%. are you excited to vote? are you getting out to vote? host: no -- caller: no. no i do not vote. i will vote for donald trump
because he is a businessman. i have been around since 1960, and things are just getting worse. host: what are your reasons for not having voted in the past? caller: because the politicians are all under by special interest groups, and wall street. get up there and tell the american public what you're going to do, live to us, they just lie to vote. they do what they want to do. they serve the special interest groups. all of our politicians are owned. they send money to foreign countries that hate us. that is crazy. we have trouble here in america. why don't we take care of all people here for a change. host: interesting perspective for somebody who said she has never voted. anything to respond to their? guest: i will say this. she sees why donald trump is popular. the not know that some of things that she had said i would disagree with, for example,
obviously there's a correlation between people giving checks to politicians and people taking meetings from those people. , the idea that politicians are owned as a little exaggerated. again, what trump has seized upon this idea that he will go in there and change. he is not beholden holder to anybody. it is fascinating. i will be fascinating to see people trump -- people vote for trump. one of the questions is how you get people who do not vote to go to the polls? is of the ways you do that get a candidate that people are passionate about. we saw that with barack obama. people got -- people went to the polls. donald trump can apparently inspire people. we will have to see people actually go to the polls for him. if they do that will be significant. guest: one more point about her.
she is saying she has not been vote for the first time you go --? we do nothing with specific cohorts. is an interesting point. i was talking to some political scientist from wisconsin. their theory is that it actually matters when you age into a voting bracket. if you turn 18 right before national election, you will be more likely to not only vote in that election but also from then on. he comes back to the idea of habit. it is an interesting perspective. voteyou become eligible to , within the national election cycle. did you do any study by income level? guest: yes, it was very narrowly focused.
we have a detailed table. it is income education. indicator,otal really if you live in a community for five years, your voting goes through the roof. that is for a lot of different years. maybe you own a house, and pay taxes. maybe your kids go to the school. practically,more you are engaged in the poll basis. your voter registration has not changed. that is a big issue. if you can do same-day voter registration that increases turnout. that past 1990's, we had a lot of young people to the polls. there are a lot of practicalities as well. host: for those who do not vote. people who don't vote cannot complain.
let's go to louisiana. nathaniel, good morning. caller: good morning. host: what would you like to say? but first, do you vote? caller: i have been voting since i was able to vote. and i never miss it. i always go right to the vote. they do not want you to vote. they don't want you to vote. i have been voting ever since i was able to vote. did you hear the additional comic? , you can't teach an old dog new tricks. i think we have a good president.
everybody cannot be wrong about everything. notatter what i do, he does do enough to finish it. nobody do a thing. when he came in. we was all, we was in a depression. so the thing is, regardless of who you get in there, you got a get somebody doing the right thing. and if he's doing the right thing about the president. all of us talknd about that stuff. whether go right there, the rolling with the man who is trying to have it and so, i believe that he's been a good president. host: is there anything you heard that you want to respond to? guest: he raised the issue of how he said his father had to pay poll tax. this is the 50th anniversary of the voting rights act.
interesting, particularly in the 2008 turnout. ago and about 50 years think about how dominant white voters were. thinking about how much things have changed since then. it came out of the anxieties and concerns of making sure that every american has the right and ability. the question is that the religious people vote more often than secular? host: we definitely have personal opinions about that. guest: it is a good question. the facts.y without host: good morning, from massachusetts. caller: hello. if you could just see the looks on your faces, with the guy from louisiana before me. that was pretty funny.
i amt wanted to say that, 31, i have never voted. i will say that because of education. have, i was not politicaln all of the , the price of like that. so i figure, why should i vote. personte for the wrong that i'm hurting the country. that is why i don't vote. know, i have a three-year-old i've been looking at things differently since obama came into office. painn doing a lot more attention and stuff like that. the problem is that is not advertised on tv.
the debate is on last night, i wanted to watch it. today, i will be trying to watch it again. host: do you think you'll be voting next time around? caller: absolutely. this will be my first year. i am proud of it. i am proud to vote. now i know what i'm voting for. host: you mentioned you have a child. is there any particular issue, or group of issues that would bring you out? caller: well, you know, as a parent,, we all want success for our children. i want him to have a good future, with him growing up, he is on disability. temporarily. should happen again as he is older, for some reason.
look at what is happening with social security. i think about that. i think about was certain areas in his life, there is a problem. i want him to be taken care of. with the economy and the way everything has been. i want everybody to have the opportunity. host: we are almost out of time. final thoughts? guest: that is a good example of somebody growing older and becoming more aware for multiple reasons. you see voting rights go up. guest: i have to say also that a lot of people are not paying attention to the cycle yet. it builds. the presidential cycle gets a lot more turnout in a lot more engagement. this is watching c-span now a year before the election. host: we can look at the study.
where can people look at this and find this? c-span.gov. they will find not just this report but all of our data going back to the 1960's. you can check out the census bureau looking at the social stratification. thank you to both of you this friday morning. thank you. guest: thank you for having us. host: appreciate your cause. washington journal
city officials are closing subway stations and possibly even bridges. up next on c-span to a discussion on the issues, logistics, and media coverage of the pope six days in the united states. this is three hours. >> i think will get started, i am sandy johnson pres. of the national press foundation and we're so glad to have you here. we have had more interest in this program than any other half-day briefing that npf has ever sponsor. i'd like. i'd like to take a misted to thank these for attending the of that, the un foundation and the aarp foundation. with that with that i will turn it over to linda. >> thank you sandy, were going
to write into logistics, i will will introduce helen osman, she is secretary of communications for the u.s. conference of bishops. she is correlating media coverage over the visit with pope francis, she has been with u.s. ccd since 2007, and 2012 the catholic press association honored her with a saint francis a sales award for personal achievement and we are happy to have her join us today. >> thank you. thanks linda, i appreciate you all being willing to work with me and getting started on time, i have a meeting that is mandatory for me and several of my colleagues to be at at 10:00 o'clock. i have a few slides i will brief through them, i would like to give more time for you to ask questions if that's okay with everyone. i thought i would go over this money very quickly what is
different from previous papal visits, i was was in the same role in 2008 when pope and it came, and he worked with colleagues and worked with colleagues who were at the conference for the previous visit from the pope. a little bit about credentialing, social media, and media, and other resources were offering to journalists. 50,000 level view of the whole schedule for pope francis, and statistically what we're doing at the conference and reaching out to the general public. level of interest is one aspect. we had had a great deal of interest in 2008 but i don't want to use hyperbole but this is on precedented. we close credentialing on friday, we have over 7000 applications from individuals and about 600 outlets that have act first space at the venues. where for pope francis will appear.
he attends to speak quite often first in spanish, then alternate and have an english translator available to him, he will go back and forth so that will be something new for us. social media, in 2008 remember it was just beginning, we had long conversations over whether we would credentialed bloggers are not. but yes we are credentialing everybody, again the whole media landscape has changed dramatically in the past seven years, mobile devices, live streaming, etc. the, et cetera. the part i would like to emphasizes the bottom line when we started planning the with the vatican it was back in january of this year, from the very beginning every time i would ask the question are these events open to the media, the answer was yes absolutely. we would like to see it
available around the world, so we have been working with the networks on pool coverage of every events. as i mentioned, we close credentialing on friday, this is only for the venues which the church has responsibility, that means weird i credentialing for the white house, congress, and united nations. we are not credentialing for the white house, united nations, or congress but everything else. we anticipate that we'll try to be engaging in conversations and social media both in spanish and in english. we have asked folks to start using # pope in the u.s. again where look working with the tv pool so we can have simultaneous translation when he is speaking in spanish or english for events. at this point we haven't looked
into details at the white house and congress and we know the un is also planning simultaneous translation. linda has graciously offered to distribute this to you also you have it. each of the filing centers we'll have a live video feed from the tv pool, we'll have copies of the speeches, bob and i were talking about that. i asked. i asked that we had those in english and in spanish, and they are aware of the need to have them as soon as possible, at least on the day of. the holy father does take great personal interest in his text and also often revises and sometimes revises as he is speaking so it's just a alert to everyone on that. we have an interview desk if people want to interview others,
the holy father is not entertaining requests for interviews. if if you are on the plane with him and that has already been determined, the media who will be there, of course he does do those on plane interviews with that group but that is the only time he will entertain interviews. we will have a other folks for you to talk with. different this trip from other trip from popes to the us, every day we'll have a briefing in the filing center from the father lombardi, he is the press officer. we'll be using the filing centers as transport center to bring the media who have received assignments to the of venues and will be using that to bring you in on buses to work with secret service and other agencies so you get where you are supposed to be, and make
sure that all those places get filled and that's extremely high demand for those. so dates to remember, i know it's hard to see in the screen here, in washington at the marriott marquis downtime, philadelphia it's the marriott associated with the convention center, and the convention center hall a is where we'll be doing the filing center so just think marriott and it will be easy to remember a mat. you will need a u.s. ecb secret service credential to go into the filing center. let me run quickly through the schedule, most of your aware of this, he is coming in from cuba on tuesday evening september 22, we'll have a briefing that day immediately after he arrives with father lombardi at the
filing center. the next morning he goes to the white house, again the white house credentials for that, immediately following that he goes to st. matthew cathedral and has midday prayer with the bishops pair. it is not a mass but it is an official prayer of the church and he'll have remarks there in spanish. following that, in the afternoon we are at the campus of the catholic university of america and the basilica, national shrine of the immaculate conception and he will celebrate mass they are, i think the number is about 22000 that is anticipated to be there. he will also officially recognize a saint in the church ill be a massive canonization. thursday will visit congress, immediately after that he will go after st. patrick's in the city where there's a maturity
center where he will meet with about 200 of the clients, folks who use catholic charity services. he he will speak in spanish with those individuals. that afternoon he leaves jfk, goes to new york, he is still not done it for the day, he visits his second st. patrick's of the day, st. patrick's cathedral. for the archdiocese of new york where he will have evening prayer with folks they are. friday morning he will go over to the united nations, again those are un credentials, after that he will go to ground zero for he will have two movements. he will will meet with individuals who were affected immediately by the events of 911, family members, first responders, et cetera on the outside run the two pools. then he will go inside and there'll be an events called a
multi- religious event, with about 700 religious leaders. after that he goes to east harlem, to a school that serves immigrant families and another catholic charity center, and and that evening he has mass at madison square garden. next morning he gets up he goes to philadelphia, has mass at the cathedral there with philadelphia archdiocese. he's greeted by seminaries at st. charles seminary where he will be in residence those two days, that afternoon he will go to independence hall and will have an address on religious freedom. that afternoon he joins families which is a multi- event celebration, music, presentation, he'll be there for
about 90 minutes but the actual best festival is about four hours at the benjamin parkland. the next day he meets with bishops who are gathering for the world meeting of families in philadelphia, from there over to sorry just blank on the name. a prison in philadelphia a group of about 100 who are are incarcerated there, most likely yet younger people. again he will be speaking in spanish and english there. then the large mass, enormous mass on the benjamin frank the parkway, we have up to 2 million people who want to participate in that and then he goes back out and wheels up about 8:00 o'clock sunday night.
a little bit about what we are doing, the u.s. ccd is launching a mobile solution, were anticipated date in the app store is august 15, it is called catholic church, we think. we'll be live streaming on that all of the events, we want to encourage people to watch, i think everyone including those of you who are in the room have stories of those who really want to get here to see pope francis, we recognize the intensity and the interest, we are encouraging parishes and schools, and dioceses dioceses to think about having watch parties locally. so virtual pilgrims if you want to call it that. our website u.s. papal visit.org is intended to be in place for people to catch live streaming and other information, we'll have a quasi- password
protection password for journalists, resources that we are developing right now. again if you want to write down anything u.s. papal visit.org will be the go to site for media, if you have logistical questions for media you can e-mail. i know you have mine which is fine, but if you sent to this one is not going to get lost in all the other stuff that i have going on. so that is a quick fly through, i i want to ask if anyone has specific questions or anything else. [inaudible] >> yes what you have to do is if you go to u.s. papal visit.org, scroll down it's on the bottom
of the homepage there is a link there to the secret service's website which is where you go to get the credential. >> yet we are hoping to get the bishop and other experts and again were compiling all of that so yes. yes sir, do you have a question? sorry. >> for the st. matthew cathedral event, can you give us a sense of how much press will be allowed in there, or who else will be allowed in there beside bishops? >> it's not a large area as you probably know, i don't know the full guest list but there will be limited access for media inside, were working on risers on the outside as well. but were working on it.
>> good morning, the credentials you're talking about is it this same one that the deadline passed on friday? >> know you can still get into the website. >> for the filing center? >> but we closed on the venue. >> this second question is the daily briefing is going to be webcast? >> yes it will all be live. >> in order to watch it you need up password-protected? >> know it will be public. it will be part of the public pool feed. so we will feed the lied briefings into what is provided through the u.s. tv pool. it will be live. >> if we apply for venue will we
get the secret service credential or do we need to do that separately? >> know the secret service credential, you will use that to access the venue. >> okay but if we've done that are ready, applied for a venue then do we also, and we want to go to the filing center do we need a separate? >> it works across all three cities. so if you apply by the first deadline you're done. i can't guarantee that you'll get into the venues you want but you'll have the credentials. >> now i'm going to introduce william douglas, he is a credit
congressional correspondent from newspaper, his reporting experience includes new york city schools, bill sick clinton's second term, that is covering congress, another kind of war and the presidential elections. bill has some pointers for getting a good story for the pope's visit from capitol hill. >> good morning and thank you very much for having me, thank you all for attending i look out there and see some family faces on capitol hill. i can speak from the capitol hill perspective of the popes speech to congress. this will be very different, if i had to describe these significance of the importance of the speech, it's going to be like a head a state visit on steroids. in terms of demand for media, in terms of demand for members of congress to actually be in the chamber for the popes
speech, congress people complain congress doesn't do a lot of things but i think last week they manage to vote next members of congress out of the chamber. they will not not be allowed in for the speech because, probably all the seats will be filled with members of the house and senate, normally when heads of state visit even with prime minister speech a couple months ago you have what you called filler. you had staff members, our interns, filling seats. that filling seats. that won't happen this time around. i doubt there'll be a member of congress who will want to skip this. for selfish purposes and covering this, this is going to be a challenge for reporters who want to cover the speech. again going back to state of the union address, going back to a normal head estates, a, a regular head of state for lack of a better phrase, we normally
go to the house or senate press gallery and say we would like to be in the house chamber and they're usually very accommodating. this time time around it will be more complicated because they have to accommodate not just us, us being the congressional, everyday u.s. press but they'll have to find room for the folks traveling press.
to that capital because with the capital you have to go through the security and there will be lines. go through the office buildings. i may sound paranoid and i tend to get in now were or too early to go through security to get set up. i would defy a is you all to do that or maybe go earlier there are vice cafeterias you can buy eight your time but just to avoid that hassle because there will be a hassle because there is more people and security and they are pretty thorough now. so give yourself time to get there. bridge in what you need to bring that will also help with security. don't bring any extra stuff like your gym bag.
[laughter] just your work stuff and security will go much quicker. for those you don't get it, as speaker greater there will be a gem quotron outside it is a ticket did even to. citizens just cannot walk up ted expect to get in and watch the speech of the jumbo trod. i would suggest for citizens to have a desire to call your member of congress for acquire not sure how that goes but i assume it may be like inauguration you call the member of congress to see if you can get a ticket. >> [inaudible] is. >> i have no idea. all i know it is limited. to what capacity is and
limited by the sheer numbers that will be there. i don't have intelligence on the exact number if you have covered a head of state speech did you have been to the gallery, you know, how long the rows are and the bench seats so just based on that. that is pretty much the upshot of what i know about getting in. do you have any questions? >> is there proceeding? >> they're still working through that. >> you mentioned coming in through the office buildings rather than directly through the capital we are accustomed to walking through with almost no
security do you suspect secret service will be beefed up at those entrances as well? >> i suspect security with the head of state with prime minister netanyahu or when the dollar lot comes, certain dignity's dictated serve lovell of security i am sure this will dictate a very high level so yes there will be much more than you are used to seeing. >> what would you say are the essentials to bring? what do you need to bring? >> if you are covering it your laptop for recording devices or your notebook your phone if you were taking pictures but just bring the basics reporting tools that you require.
but just pack a bag smart to get yourself through security quickly. >> don't forget extra batteries. if you are not able to get into that capital and not one of the lucky people with a ticket, you were standing outside. what would you say are the best tips for people looking for a live stream on their phone which would be possible? >> taking their other reporting opportunities if you do it windup on the west front watch the jumbotron to have automatic access to people to interview say you have the advantage of the reporter inside the chamber because once that speech begins, you are pretty much going to be where you are you are stuck in place. your ability to get around, i like to joke when
it comes to the white house you are a stuck pig you can only go to the briefing area or one paul and in congress you are a free range chicken but you don't have that with this. the you are in the chamber you are in the chamber of you were in the press gallery that is where you are in the senate press gallery that is where you are. no questions. if you have an idea to talk to a member of congress it will not be that easy. >> you don't think they will do anything with statuary hall? >> i have not heard anything. i am just speculating i would tend to doubt that because of security. the previous speaker laid out the agenda.
if he does the author record and decides to rome to visit statuary hall, no. i think that would be difficult. [laughter] call your member of congress to make a date to speak 45 minutes after the speech but if you're looking for the instant reaction try to roll-call in the advance of taking call you shortly after the speech. >> if you said don't have press credentials on a regular basis so if you go to one place in you could get access what is the best office to call? you had a lot of ideas