tv Key Capitol Hill Hearings CSPAN November 19, 2015 8:00pm-12:01am EST
c-span3 and c-span radio. and for background on each case while you watch, order the copy of the landmark cases companion book, it's available for 8.95 plus shipping at c -- c-span.org/landmarkcases. >> senator bernie sanders on democratic socialism. today in the house members voted 289 to 137 to increase restrictions on syrian and iraqi refugees seeking asylum in the united states. as political reports the 289, yes, votes make a veto prove
majority. a review of president obama by house democrats that felt the administration did not make the case as to why they should vote the republican author bill when it could have hurt them politically to do so. the bill heads to the senate where future is uncertain. next presidential candidate hillary clinton laying out plan to combat isis group in syria and iraq. the former secretary of state spoke in foreign relations in new york city and took questions for cnn hosts and the audience. this is just over an hour.
[applause] >> please be seated. good morning, ladies and gentlemen. mr. mayor, welcome. i would like to welcome you all to the council on foreign relations. for those of you who do not know us, we are an independent nonpartisan membership organization and publisher for nearly 5,000 members, government officials, business pe cue activist, journalists, educators and students, civic and religious leaders and other citizens to help them better understand the world and the foreign policy choices facing this and other countries.
consistent with the mission we are making ourself a resource for the presidential candidates and their staffs as well as for the american people in the run off for 2016 presidential election. i've written to republican and democrats alike to speak and take questions from our members. so far we have had marco rubio, the senator from rubio and jim web, former senator from virginia. this tuesday in washington chris christie, the governor of new jersey is scheduled to speak. today, however, we are pleased and honored to host the former secretary of state and former senator from the great state of new york hillary clinton. today's conversation will be conducted by sicaria, thinkers
of international relations and american policy. has host show secaria of gps. the format for today we will hear remarks on u.s. national after which she will take questions. we aim to establish all of this in the span of one hour so we can conclude by roughly 11:30. madame secretary, senator, i want to welcome you back in foreign relations, the podium is yours. [applause] >> thank you, thank you very much. thank you, richard, and thanks
for the great work that the council does you should your leadership, it truly is an important resource for us all. i look forward to have having the conversation with you. everyone here at the council and mr. mayor, thank you very much for being here and for everything you are doing and will do to keep our city safe and strong. i'm very grateful. i wanted to come here to our city, which has shown such resilience in the face of terrorism to talk about the events of the past week and the work we must do together to protect our country and our friends. when the united states was hit on 9/11 our allies treated that attack against one as an attack against all. now, it's our turn to stand in solidarity, france and all of our friends. we cherish the same values and
we must share the same determination. after a major terrorist attack, every society faces a choice between fear and resolve. the world's great democracies isn't sacrifice our values or turn our backs on those in need, therefore, we must choose resolve and we must lead the world to meet this threat. let's be clear about what we are facing. beyond paris in recent days we have seen deadly terrorists attacks in nigeria, lebanon, iraq and turkey and russian civilian airline destroyed in sanai. they per -- persecute religions.
an international terrorist network that includes affiliates across the region and beyond and an ideological movement. and time is of the essence. isis is demonstrated new ambition, reach and capabilities. we have to break the group's momentum and then it's back. our goal is not to deter or contain isis but to defeat and destroy isis. but we have learned that we can score victories over terrorist leaders and networks only to face threats down the road. so we also have to play and win
the long game. we should pursue a comprehensive counterterrorism strategy. one that embeds our mission within isis within radical jehadism that's bigger than any one group. whether it's al-qaeda or isis or some other network. an immediate war against an urgent enemy and generational struggle with deep roots will not be easily torn out. it will require power. one defeat isis in syria, iraq and across the middle east.
three, harden our defenses and those of our allies against external and home-grown threats. let me start with the campaign to defeat isis across the region. united states and our international coalition has been conducting this fight for more than a year. it's time to begin a new phase and intensify and broaden our efforts to smash and deny isis control of territory in iraq and syria. that starts with a more effective coalition air campaign, with more allied planes, more strikes and a broader target set. a key obstacle standing in a way is a shortage of good intelligence about isis and its operation. so we need an immediate intelligence in the region including tech -- technical and
speakers with closer partnership with regional and intelligent services. our goal to achieve penetration that we have achieved with al-qaeda in the past. this will help us identify and eliminates isis command and control and its economic lifelines. a more effective coalition air campaign is necessary but not sufficient. we should be honest about the fact that to be successful air strikes will have to be combined with ground forces actually taking back more territory from isis. by president obama i do not believe that we should again have a hundred thousand american troops in combat in the middle east. that's just not the smart move to make here. if we've learned from anything from 15 years of war is that local people and nations have to
secure their own communities. we can help them and we should, but we cannot substitute for them. what we can and should support local and regional ground forces in carrying out this mission. now the obstacles to achieving this are significant. on the iraqi side of the border kurdish have fought to defend their own lands. but the iraqi national army has struggled and it's going to take more work to get it up to fighting shape. as part of that process we may have to give our own troops advising and training iraqis greater freedom of movement and flexibility and helping target air strikes. ultimately, however, the campaign will succeed if more iraqi soonies will join the fight, but that will not happen
so long they feel they do not have a stake in their country or confidence in their own security and capacity to confront isis. now we've been in a similar place before in iraq. in the first soonie awakening in 2007 we were able to provide sufficient support to persuade them to join us in rooting out al-qaeda. unfortunately under prime minister malaki's rule, they were forgotten. but nonetheless, we need to lay the foundation for a second soonie awakening. we need to put sustained pressure on the government in bagdad to get political house in order and move forward with
reconciliation and finally stand up a national guard. bagdad needs to accept, even embrace arming soonie and kurdish forces in the war against isis. if baghdad won't do that, coalition should do. more ground services to engage isis beyond the syrian curds that are deep in the fight. the viable soonie opposition groups remains preoccupied with fighting assad, who let us remember has killed many more syrians than the terrorists have. but they are increasingly under threat from isis as well. so we need to move simultaneously toward a politically solution to the civil war that paves the way for a new government with new leadership and encourage more syrians to take on isis as well.
to support them, we should immediately deploy the special operations force president obama has already authorized and be prepared to deploy more as more syrians get into the fight and we should retool and ramp up our efforts to support and equip viable syrian opposition units. our increased support should go hand-in-hand with increase support from arab and european partners including special forces who can contribute to the fight on the ground. we should also work with coalition and neighbors to impose no-fly zones that will stop assad from slaughtering civilians and opposition from the air. opposition forces on the ground with material support from the coalition present safe areas where syrians could remain in the country rather than fleeing toward europe. this combined approach would
help enable the opposition to retake the remaining stretch of the turkish border from isis choking off its supply lines. it would also give us new leverage in the diplomatic process that secretary kerry is pursuing. of course, we've been done several diplomatic dead-ends before in the conflict, but we have models how seemingly and tractable multicivil wars do eventually end. we can learn lessons from lebanon and bosnia about what it would take and russia and iran have to face the fact that continuing to prop up a vicious dictator will not bring stability. right now, i'm afraid president putin is making things somewhat worse, to be clear, though, there is an important role for russia to help in resolving the conflict in syria and we have
indicated a willingness to work with them toward an outcome that preserves syrian as a state with protection to the rights of all syrians and to keep key state institutions in tact. there is no alternative to a political transition that allows syrians to end assad's rule. now much of the strategy on both sides of the border hinges on the role of our arab and turkish partners and we must get them to carry their share of the burden with military intelligence and financial contributions as well as using their influence with fighters and tribes in iraq and syria. countries like jordan have offered more and we should take them up on it because ultimately our efforts will only succeed if the arabs and turks step up in a
much bigger way. this is their fight and they need to act like it. so far, however, turkey has been more focused on the kurds than on countering isis. to be fair, turkey has a long and painful history with kurdish terrorists groups, but we need to get turkey to stop bombing occurreddish -- kurdish fighters in syria who are battling isis. the united states should also work with our arab partners to get them nor invested in the fight against isis. at the moment their focus in other areas because of their concerns in the region, specially the threat from iran. that's why the saudis, for example, shifted attention. so we have to work a common approach. in september i layed out a
comprehensive plan to counteract such as hezbollah and hamaz, we cannot view iran and isis as separate challenges. regional politics are too interwoven. and as we work out a regional approach, we should, of course, be closely consulting with israel, our strongest ally in the middle east. israel increasingly shares with our arab partners and has the opportunity to do more in intelligence and joint efforts as well. now, we should have no illusions about how difficult the mission before us really is. we have to fit a lot of pieces
together and move on multiple front seat at once, but if we press forward on both sides of the border in the air and on the ground, i believe we can crush isis terror, and to support this campaign, congress should swiftly pass authorization to use military force. that will send a message to friend and foe alike that the united states is committed to this fight. the time for delay is over, we should get this done. now, the second almost of our strategy looks beyond the immediate battlefield of iraq and syria to disrupt and dismantle global terrorists infrastructure on the ground and on line. a terror pipeline that facilities the flaw of fighters, financing, arms and propaganda around the world has allowed isis to strike at the heart of paris last week and al-qaeda to
do the same earlier this year. isis is working hard to extend its reach, establish affiliates far from home base and despite significant set abacks -- setbacks it has encountered but even al-qaeda, including the death of osama ben laden, they are still posing great threat to so many. let's take one example. we've had a lot of conversation about isis in the last week. let's not forget al-qaeda. they still have the most sophisticated bomb makers and vicious plotters and active affiliates in places like yemen and north africa. we can't just focus on iran and syria. most urgent is stopping the flow
of foreign fighters to and from the war zones of the middle east, thousands of young recruits have flocked to syria, belgium, united kingdom, and yes, even the united states. their western passports make it easier for them to cross borders and eventually return home ral -- radicalized. we should not stop pressing until turkey, where most foreign fighters cross into syria finally locks down its borders. united states and allies need to know and share the identities of every fighter that has traveled to syria. we have to be smart and target interventions that will have the greatest impact. for example, we need a greater focus on shutting down key
enablers who arrange transportation, documents and more. when it comes to terrorist financing we have to go after the once who facilitate. un security council should update terrorism sanctions. they have a resolution that does try to block terrorist financing and other enabling activities, but we have to place more obligations on countries to police their own banks and the united states which has quite a record of success in this area can share more intelligence to help other countries. and once and for all the saudis and others need to stop their citizens from directly funding extremist organizations as well as schools and mosques around the world that have set too many young people on a path to rat -- radicalization. we have to identify the hot spots, the specific
neighborhoods and villages, the prisons and schools where recruitment happens in clusters like the neighborhood in brussels where the terrorist attacks were planned. through partnership with local law enforcement and civil society special you with muslim leaders, we have to in these hot spots. there's no doubt we have to do a better job contesting online space including websites and chat rooms where jihadist communicate with followingers. -- followers. at the state department i build up a unit of communication specialists fluent in arabic, somalian to battle with extremists online. we need more of that including from the private sector.
social med accompanies can also do their part by swiftly shutting down terrorist accounts so they are not used to plan for both or celebrate violence. online or offline, the bottom line is that we are in a context of ideas against an ideology of hate and we have to win. let's be clear, islam is not our adversary. muslims are peaceful and tolerant people and have nothing whatsoever to do with terrorism. the obsession in some corders with clash of civilization or repeating the specific records, radical islamic terrorism isn't just a distraction, it gives these criminals, more murdererrers more standing than they deserve. our priority should be how to fight the enemy.
in the end, it didn't matter what kind of terrorists we called ben laden, it mattered that we killed ben laden, but we still can't close our eyes to the fact that there is a distorted and dangerous stream of extremism within the muslim world that continues to spread. it's adherent but capable of causing profound damage, most specially to their own communities throughout an arc of instability that stretches from north and west africa to asia. overlapping conflicts, collapsing structures, poverty and repression have created openings for extremist to exploit. before the arab spring i warned that the region foundations would sink into the sand without immediate reform. the need has grown more urgent.
we have to join with our partners to do the patient steady work of empowering moderates, supporting democratic institutions and the rule of law, creating economic growth that supports stability, working to curve corruptions, helping train effective and accountable law enforcement intelligence and counterterrorism services. as we do this, we must be building up a global counterterrorism infrastructure that is more effective and adaptable than the terror networks we are trying to defeat when i became secretary of state i was surprised to find that nearly a decade there was no international vehicle to regularly convene countries to deal with terrorist threats. so we created the global counterterrorism forum which now brings together nearly 30 countries, many from the muslim
world. it should be a clearing house for directing assistance for countries that need it and let's not lose sight of cooperation of nuclear material and biological weapons and keep them out of the hands of terrorists. at the end of the day, we still must be prepared to go after terrorists wherever they plot using our tools at our disposal. that includes targeted strikes by military aircraft and drones with proper safe guards when there are aren't any other vilable options to deal with continueing eminent threats. blocking financing, battle in cyberspace is vital to the world against isis but also lays the foundation for diffusing and defeating the next threat and the one after that. the third element of our
strategy has to be hardening defenses at home and helping partners do the same against both external and home-grown threats. the united states made a lot of progress breaking down bureaucratic barriers for allowing better information sharing among agencies responsible for keeping us safe. we still have would recollect to do on this front but by comparison europe is way behind. when a passport is stolen, it steams like after most terrorist attacks we find out that the perpetrators were known to some security form or another but too often the dots never get connected. i appreciate how hard this is specially given the number of suspects and threats, but that has to change. united states must work with
europe to dramatically and improve intelligence sharing and counterterrorism coordination. european countries also should have the flexibility to enhance their border controls when circumstances warrant and here at home we face a number of our own challenges. the threat to airline security is evolving as terrorists develop new devices like nonmet alic bombs, so our defenses have to stay at least one step ahead. we know that intelligence gathered and shared by local law enforcement officers is absolutely critical to breaking up plots and preventing attacks, so they need all the resources and support we can give them. law enforcement also needs the trust of resident and communities including in our own country muslim american. now this should go without saying but in the current climate it bears repeating.
another challenge is how to strike the right balance of protecting privacy and security. encryption of mobile communications presents a particularly tough problem. we should take the concerns of law enforcement and counterterrorism professionals seriously. they have warned that encryption may prevent them from accessing terrorist communication and preventing a future attack. on the other hand, we know there are legitimate concerns about government intrusion, network security and creating new vulnerabilities, that bad actors can and would exploit. so we need silicon valley not to view as adversary, we need to challenge our best minds to work with the best minds in the
public sector to develop solutions that will both keep us safe and protect our privacy. now is the time to solve the problem, not after the next attack. since paris, no homeland security challenge is being more hotly debated than how to handle syrian refugees seeking safety in the united states. our highest priority, of course, must always be protecting the american people, so, yes, we do need to be vigilant in screening refugees from syria guided by the best judgment of our security professionals in close coordination with our allies and partners and congress needs to make sure the necessary resources are provided for comprehensive background checks drawing on the best intelligence we can get, and we should be taking a close look at the safe guards and the visa programs as well, but we cannot allow
terrorist to intimidate us in abandoning our values and our humanitarian obligations. turning away orphans and applying test and discriminating and slamming the door on every syrian refugee, that's just not who we are. we are better than that, and remember many of the refugees are fleeing the same terrorists that are threatening us. it would be a cruel irony indeed if isis can force families from their home and also prevent them from ever finding new ones. we should be doing more to ease this humanitarian crisis, not less. we should lead the international community in organizing a donor conference and supporting countries like jordan who are sheltering the majority of refugees fleeing syria, and we can get this right, america is open, free, tolerant society is
described by some as vulnerability in the struggle against terrorism, but i actually believe it's one of our strengths. it reduces the appeal of radicalism and richness and resilience of our communities. it's not a time for scoring political points. when new york was attacked on 9/11, we had a republican president a republican governor and a republican mayor and i worked with all of them. we pulled together and put partisanship aside to rebuild our city and protect our country. this is a time for american leadership, no other country can rally the world to defeat isis and win the generational struggle against radical jehadism. only the united states can move common action on a global scale, that's exactly what we need. the entire world must be part of
this fight, but we must lead it. there's been a lot of talk lately about coalitions. everyone seems to want one but there's not nearly as much as talk about what it actually takes to make a coalition work in the pressure of international crisis. i know how hard it is because we've done it before. to impose the toughest sanctions in the history of iran and stop dictator from slaughtering in libya and democracy in afghanistan, we have to use every pillar and that is smart power. we have to work with institutions and partners like nato, eu, arab league and un and strengthen alliances and never
get tired of old-fashion, show-leather diplomacy. united states and our allies must demonstrate that free people and free markets are still the hope of humanity. this past week as i watched the tragic scenes from france, i kept thinking back to a young man the world met in january after the last attack in paris. his name was lozana, muslim immigrant who worked at a kosher market. he said it had become a new home and colleagues and customers a second family. when the terrorists arrived and the gunfire began, ozana risked his life to protect his jewish customers. he moved quickly hiding as many people as he could in the cold
storage rooms and then slipping out to help the police. i didn't know or cared if they were jews or muslims, we are in the same boat. what a a rebuke, but when it mattered most, he proved he was a citizen already. that's the power of free people, that's what the jehadis will never understand and never defeat, and as we meet here today, let us resolve that we will go forward together and we will do all we can to lead the world against this threat, that's threatening people everywhere. thank you all. [applause]
>> thank you so much, madame secretary and thank you, richard for organizing this extraordinary opportunity. in the wake of the paris attacks president obama said that he thought what we needed now was an itensification. >> but it has to also intensify and accelerate our efforts in the other arenas. what we have done with air strikes has made a difference, but now it needs to make a greater difference and we need
more of a coalition, what we have done with the president saying there would be special forces sent is right in line with what i think but they need to get there and check stock of whether we need more and empower our trainers in iraq to have more support to do what they're trying to accomplish by getting the iraqi army, once, again, to be a fighting force. and when he need one thing that i believe we haven't done yet is make it clear to bagdad that we are going to be arming soonie tribes and kurds if they don't. because at some point they have to be in the fight. the kurds are fighting greatly on both sides of the border and they need the support that we've given them and some of the special ops work and the assault and taking back of sinjar and the other two elements that i
mentioned. we have to deepen and better coordinate not only within our own country in europe but more broadly. >> do you believe that president obama underestimated isis when he called it the jb team? >> i don't think it's useful to replow old ground fr the sper -- from the perspective of what they had accomplished at the time, even though they had ceased and held territory, the major focus of our government was on trying to remove assad from power so that there could be a resolution, a political resolution and there were so many groups fighting. there were so many other factors at work. now that isis has made clear that i think in part because they have been pushed hard by the air strikes, by the kurds, they are now expanding their
reach so that they can keep their propaganda going. it's been an evolution in their threat and we have to meet it. >> a couple of days ago new york times, terrorist counterattack with obama. has it? >> it's not the first headline that i have disagreed. i have made it clear that i have differences. i was very proud to serve as president obama's secretary of state. i think we made a good team. we largely agreed on what needed to be done to repair our alliances to get our country in a position to deal with the wars that it had been inherited and take on the new challenges we faced. but even when i was still there, i thought we needed to do more to try to identify syrian
fighters, moderates, i think there were some early on that we could have done more to help them in their fight against assad, but, you know, this is an evolving and fast-moving situation. we are all working to, you know, make sure that what we do actually will produce the results we seek. >> when you were secretary of state you tended to agree a great deal with the then secretary of defense bob gates. gates was opposed to a no-fly zone in syria. this seems to me the major difference with what obama's administration is doing and what you're proposing. what do you disagree with bob gates on this in. >> i believe that the no-fly zone is merited and can be implemented, again, in a coalition. i fully respect bob and his
knowledge about the difficulties of implementing a no-fly zone, but if you look at where we are right now, we have to try to clear the air of the bombing attacks that are still being carried out by a syrian government and supplemented by russian air force. we had a no-fly zone over northern iraq for years to protect the kurds and it proved to be successful, not easy, it never is, but i think now is the time for us to revisit those plans. i also believe as i said in the speech that if we begin a conversation about no-fly zone, something turkey discussed with me when i was secretary of state in 2012, it will confront a lot of our partners in the region
and beyond about what they are going to do and can give us leverage of discussions that secretary kerry is carrying on right now. i see it as both a strategic opportunity on the ground and a -- an opportunity for leverage in peace negotiations. >> you talked about arab partners, saudi arabia is essentially dropped out, ua dropped out. what would you -- what can you do particularly to make these key soonie states that see more interested in fighting in yemen where they are battling forces. what can you do to make them actually take this on as their struggle? well, we did build the coalition with respect to libya. we had jordan involved in what we were doing on the ground and
it takes constant outreach. obviously you have to define the problem as the way it's affecting their interest. they have put all the resources against iranian backers in yemen. now what does that mean? they see the battle that they want to fight as one against iran and its proxies. my argument to them to me left unattended, you could have iranian reach. if you allow syria to fall into as terrible of distress as it currently is and basically assad being a proxy for a front-man for the iranians, russians are interested in their naval base.
as i mentioned in the speech, i spoke about the foundation of the area sinking in the sand just as the arabs were breaking. i did so not knowing the air above spring coming to full bloom but it was so clear of what was doing by denial of opportunity, by the secretary divide, it could not stand. it was going to explode at some point or another. with the developments in libya, for example, the libyan people
voted twice in free and fair elections for the kind of leadership they want. they have not been able to figure out how to prevent the disruptions that they are confronted with because of internal divides and because of some of the external pressures that are coming from terrorist groups and others. so i think it is too soon to tell. i think it is something we have to be looking at very closely. now most of it left problems but the problem we came at by having a deal, in fact my husband is talking about the dayton accords the people have been slaughtering each other and result to exist within a government together. is it perfect? no. but has it cap going, and have
we kept going. absolutely. so we have to look at these different situations on their own as well as part of bigger trends. >> several of the people running against whoever the democrat is argue that we should not be taking in syrian refugees. if we we do, we should prioritize christian refugees, jeb bush has said this, ted cruz has said this, they are being particularly persecuted by isis. >> i just don't think we should have religious tests of who we bring as refugees in our country. we have, in the past i looked more more than 2 million refugees since 1990. so far, we know that trying to that and understand the connections that a person or a
family might have with someone in the united states, looking to see what organization, often a faith-based organization will sponsor them and what they will do to help them get education or job. that is by far the best way to sort out and to determine who should be included. now, this is going to take a long time. really, doing this is hard under any circumstances. doing it when people are essentially stateless, they don't necessarily have documents, it is hard to do the vetting. it is going to be challenging which is why said in the speech congress should be providing resources for us to do this right. not not trying to stop it. i just don't believe that is in keeping with our values are history. frankly it doesn't doesn't send that kind of message that we want to stand to the rest of the world. we have to be careful, we have to be vigilant, we have to have a system that does all of that. >> let's open it up to members of the council, if someone wants
to put up their hand, identify themselves and please make sure it is a question with a? at the end. and make it brief. >> thank you very much for your comments. with respect to tpp, i would like to understand a little bit better why you oppose it and what changes would perhaps make it acceptable to you? >> there are two problems that i see with it. one, the final language of the treaty itself which i don't think went far enough to meet the test that i have always applied to any tried agreement. i have voted for them and i have voted against them when i was a senator. does it help to create more good paying jobs in america, does it reason comes, does it raise our national security? i think are enough on answer
questions. it was an extraordinary effort to try to bring these countries together to come up with an agreement, i think at the end of the day for a number of reasons, including they cannot figure out how to get currency into the agreement and it is only a side agreement, i opposed it. the other side of the coin though is we have been doing so little because of republican opposition, mostly, mostly, to better train and prepare people who have been either sidelined or wrapped up by their head from globalization. globalization is real, we do not have a good training program, we do not have the kind of support people need to move into positions where they can acquire new skills. i see those those two things is going together. because we have to first and
foremost focus on how we better prepare more americans to be competitive in the global economy. i do not not think we have done that. i want to see that done alongside any tried agreement to strengthen the republicans have been willing to support it. >> madam secretary, amy bondurant. so importantly you have recommended the u.s. lead the air coalition. i wondered what next steps might be taken to ensure that what happened? >> well amy, there is nothing magic or easy about putting together such a coalition. i know presidents around will be coming to the states to see president obama this week. i assume there'll be a group of
defense officials, intelligence officials, homeland security officials, that will be meeting with their american counterparts. on the defense side i think certainly the united states working with france and from that sort of hubbub beginning to reach out to other countries to seek out other support. i i would go back to arab countries as well. so looking for a way to begin the discussions about the negotiations that lead to the coalition as quickly as possible. going back to libya, the europeans were the ones who wanted americans support and we did not agree to do so until we had a very clear idea what they were willing to do. then we reach out and worked with the arab league so there would be air partners as well. that took weeks. it was not something that happened overnight.
but it is definitely doable if we begin with the french-american position and move out from there. >> carrie whitney. my understanding is with regard to u.s. supported syria rebels over the last year to one of the main restraints as they did not fight aside directly. if this is a severe limitation a part of the plant that did not work. when you recommend supporting additional training for syrian rebel groups, would you advise them to fight aside or is that a part of a conflict we don't want to get into? >> back in the first term when dave patrice and i made our recommendation on vetting and arming syrian moderate rebels the target was a side aside.
it was to prevent the military taking over territory and creating the type of humanitarian disaster that we now see. that is what we recommended in the first term. since then, i know it has been a very difficult task for our government to take on and pursue successfully, but one of the challenges has been trying to draw lines. if you draw the lines because you want to be able to vet and follow what happens to the arms that you are equipping people with. but what happened with some of the few groups that have been trained is that they were quickly overrun by much more hardened fighters who were fighting aside. was a very hard task to do two or three years later.
i think it might've been but i i am sad i cannot predict what would happen if we had moved earlier. it may have work, it may have not work. you cannot you cannot really take syrians who are rebelling against the side. let me ask a follow-up on that madam secretary. if the only way you can put together a moderate syrian force is by having the united states cajole, bribe, arm, and train train it, we're then looking for the force to defeat isis then defeat aside and then defeat other affiliates. they take control of damascus and establish a democracy in syria. isn't that kind of a tall order. >> certainly described like that. that is why i focused on isis.
i think right now we have one overriding goal. as i outline, we need to crush their territorial domain and we need to try to secure the entire border between syria and turkey. there is not going to be a successful military effort at this point to overturn the assad regime, that that can only happen through the political process. our effort should be focused on isis. yes, there are other terrorist groups. there particularly. >> no fight against -- >> we have to prioritize. we had an opportunity, perhaps i wants it would have work. right now we have the russians in protecting aside, the iranians and has below protecting aside, we need people to turn against the
common enemy of isis. then we need to figure out how we put together a political outcome that provides enough autonomy so that the separate communities within syria will be able to re-create a syrian state even though it is probably unlikely it will be controlled by damascus the same way it was before the civil war started. >> there's policy here but there's also politics. there are inescapably people trying to appear tough and tougher. if there were another terrorist attack, god forbid in the united states, do you think the pressure to send american troops into syria would be unstoppable question that. >> will, it was really grow but i think but i think it would be a mistake. as i said, we should be sending morse vessel operators, we should be empowering our trainers in iraq.
we should be leading an air coalition using both fighter planes and drones. we have a lot of work to do to be able to really decimate isis in iraq and syria. but we have got to work with the kurds on both sides of the border. we have to figure out how to, if it is possible how to have a second awakening and get the sunni tribes to feel that it is their fight again as they once did. that that requires a lot of political pressure being put on baghdad. injecting some large contingent of american forces complicates that, in, in my opinion. right now we need to keep the pressure on the people on the ground and get them to change their priorities and work together. >> back to the no-fly zone. are
you you advocating a no-fly zone over the entire country? or partial no fly zone where refugees may find a safe haven? in the event of either do for see you may be potentially provoking the russians? >> i am advocating the second. a no-fly zone principally overt northern syria, close to the turkish border, cutting off the supply lines, trying to provide some safe refugees, creating a safe space away from the barrel bombs and other bombardment by the syrians. i would certainly expect to and hope to work with the russians to be able to do that. the russians have, as you know, been primarily a focused on
sides enemies. not on isis. i think that has changed and after he comes here he is going to moscow to see putin. as i said earlier, i think getting russia to play a role in that and getting aside to understand what happens to him will be a result of a political rebel resolution which secretary kerry is undertaking right now but to have a swath of territory that could be a safe zone both for syrians so they would not have to leave but also for humanitarian relief. i think it would give us this extra leverage that i'm looking for in the diplomatic pursuit with russia with respect to the outcome of syria. >> we can take one more brief question. >> my question is as we leave saudi arabia do think the goals
outlined in the middle east can be achieved? more cooperation from saudi arabia and if not how do you think it can be convinced to change the course question marks. >> i think the saudis are critical to achieving the goals. the saudis are now engaged in the discussions that secretary kerry is leading, they are in the same process as the iranians which it was something that was hard to get to but finally achieved. i think the saudis have a multiple level of responsibilities. first and foremost foremost stop in their own citizens from continuing their financing for extremists. saudi financing is still a major source of revenue for terrorist groups inside syria, inside-out rock. >> including isis you think? >> i have no evidence of that. isis has become quite a self
financing terrorist network with their vast of oil and selling it on the black market with their destruction and seizure of antiquities, selling that on the black market. they are taking over muzzle and rating the banks. they have a source of funding. i don't really know but i know the saudi individuals have certainly funded other related terrorist groups over time. also exported a lot of the hobby radicalism by kicking out or sending out emond's and and teachers to a set of schools and mosques to teach that particularly harsh brand of islam. saudis have a lot they can do to both stop into hell. that is why said they are can legitimately concerned about a takeover in yemen that lets up against their border.
that is why they can do a lot of resources and reestablish the government. they they have a lot going on there. i would hope to draw them into a broader reading into what is going on in the region. for a lot of people the sunni shia secretary and divide is one of the major reasons for what is happening there, it is understandable that the saudis need to have a broader view and looking at iran's influence inside zero, their groin influence in iraq as well as in yemen they have to help us stabilize northern syria to start with while trying to come up with some resolution of the civil war. i hope they'll be more willing to be about. >> madam secretary, thank you so much for giving us your time.
[applause]. on the next "washington journal", frederick kagan of the american edgar enterprise institute on u.s. strategy against isis. wall street journal reporter damien pallotta on how law-enforcement conducts surveillance and counterterrorism. and a report on how to rank the states on how to determine is corruption. "washington journal" live on c-span at 7:00 a.m. eastern time with your phone calls, tweets, facebook comments. >> all campaign long c-span takes on the road to the white house. on filtered access to the candidates at town hall meetings, news conferences, rallies, and speeches. we are taking your comments on twitter, facebook, and by phone. always,
every campaigning that we cover is available, every campaigning that we cover is available on our website at c-span.org. >> coming up on c-span to senator bernie sanders speaking about democratic socialism. and senators debate the administration's plan to accept searing refugees. later, refugees. later, a hearing on child trafficking. >> on friday, a form on housing finance and policy issues. a live coverage of the urban institute third annual housing symposium starts at 8:45 a.m. eastern. that is on c-span2. >> book tv, 48 hours eight hours of nonfiction books and authors are featured programs as we can include the 32nd annual miami book fair. our life, all they coverage starts saturday and sunday at 10:00 a.m. eastern. saturday at 10:00 p.m. eastern, afterwards with historian neil ferguson on his book kissinger,. >> kissinger gives us an idea i
think that is what made his contribution fusion fundamentally distinctive. he stood out from the pact of people. they could solve the cold war with systems and analysis. >> he is interviewed by on the council of foreign relations. on sunday night at 8:00 p.m., former editor of the london-based and author of the book islamic state, the digital caliphate. on the rise of isis. the message used to take over much of syria and iraq. the rivalry with al qaeda. watch book tv all weekend, every weekend, as he spent two. >> today democratic presidential candidate senator bernie sanders talked about democratic socialism. the speeches at
georgetown university. he test on why he believes the ideology can help americans in their everyday lives. this is an hour and 40 minutes. >> [applause]. thank you. wow. look at this. [applause]. there is some excitement in this room today. thank thank you, thank you all for coming on behalf of of the school of public policy, the institute of politics and public service at georgetown university, thank you for being here. i'm going to try to be brief because i'm guessing you are not here for me. of years ago when the school became the first new school at georgetown in decades, it really came together about the commitment to bring together the notion of the jesuit ideal of seer service for the common good.
an evidence-based policy, bringing them together. part of that vision was to create an institute that looked at the practical side of politics. with a focus on engaging young people in public service. that vision here on campus was realize the semester with the creation of the institute of politics and public service, or g politics as we like to call it. i like to thank the dean for your leadership on that [applause]. >> i'm not to say met because you are my boss and you are in the front row. [laughter] >> key politics is we believe that politics is a beautiful. it is how democracy settle their differences. most major movements in our nation's history were relies, at least in part, through a practical political element. when it is done right it is how we as a nation realize our
dreams and goals of the people. when it is done right. but it is not always done right. there is a a real disconnect right now between people and their politics today. nowhere is that more evident than with your generation. it is not that your generation is disengaged. i think those of you who are standing out there in the rain for hours this morning proved that point. but politics do not always speak to young people the way it used too. or the way that it ought to. the goal at geopolitics is to figure out ways to address that. one, pull back the curtain, show you how politics is actually done from the people who actually do it and bring that political access in d.c. to you, here on campus. more importantly, we are here to engage you, i was in politics for 20 years politics for 20 years before i came back to start this institute i can't
teach people how to do politics, one who broke it. there is a better way to do it and we need to hear from you what it is. so it is a master that we are gathered here today. regardless. regardless of whether or not you agree with his politics, you have to give today speaker a lot of credit. he is energized, a tremendous number tremendous number of americans with a message of engagement both socially and politically. the the speech is giving today has the potential to be a defining moments of the 2016 presidential presidential campaign. the fact that he came here to give it and to take your question afterward is his testament to engagement i am thrilled that he is here today, i am thrilled that you are here today and with dialogue maybe we can reconnect people with the political system. as we like like to say at gu politics, politics is a good thing.
with that, i like to bring up the person that is going to introduce our speaker. [applause]. don't you just love this. studying international political economy, she is originally from appleton, wisconsin and she is a member of the gu politics do not advisory board. aside from government, politics, and economics she is passionate about gender equality. when she is not in class you can find her at her campus job at a career center or on an aimless walk somewhere. please join me in giving her a warm welcome. [applause].
thank you for the introduction. thank thank you all for being here today. it is an absolute honor to be able to introduce our guest, 2016 presidential candidate, senator bernie sanders. [applause]. as mentioned i am a senior in the in the advisory board member for gq politics. i joined gu politics looking for space on campus where i can meet other students as a passionate about public engagement as i am am from both sides of the aisle. standing here today, i can can confidently say that i have found just that. gu politics is making conversations like the one we are going to have today possible. i'm i'm proud to be part of that. you might be skipping various commitments or should be in
class, but the fact that you have been waiting in line for hours and have billed to the brim speaks to how engaged are students truly are. you are here because you care about what is going on in the world outside of the front gates and you want to be a part of that dialogue. that is amazing. now, i am am honored to introduce senator bernie sanders. [applause].
we are so excited to have with us today senator sanders, or bernie as he is down to the people of vermont and others were feeling the burn. this is the point where i should ask you to turn your phone off, but i i won't, as long as you keep it silent we want you to continue the conversation by tweeting at gu politics using the #. please help me welcome senator bernie sanders [applause]. [applause]. thank you all for being out on
this beatable day. [applause]. let me thank mole for that wonderful introduction. i think my message to you all today is a pretty simple one. that is, our country faces some enormous problems and these problems are not going to be solved if the people turn away from political struggle. if it people throw up their hands in despair and say i do not want to get involved in this crap. you are getting a great great education here at georgetown, i hope it very much you will learn and use what you have learned here, to fight to create a better world and to follow in the traditions of so many people, for so many years who have struggled to create a more
democratic and just society. let me take you now back to the 1937 and in his inaugural address, in the midst of the great depression, president franklin d roosevelt looked out at the nation amidst a terrible depression and this is what he saw and this is what he talked about in his in our girl. he saw tens of billions of people denied the basic necessity of life, he saw millions of families trying to live on incomes so meager that the family disaster hung over them every single day. he sought millions of his fellow americans denied education, recreation, and the opportunity to better their lot and a lot of
their children. he saw millions lacking the means to buy the products they needed, and by their poverty, by their lack of disposable income denying employment to many other millions. when you do not have money to spend you are not creating jobs for other people. he saw one third of a nation ill housed, ill clad, and ill nourished. and he acted against the ferocious opposition of the ruling class of his day, people he called the economic royalist, roosevelt implemented a series of programs that put millions of americans back to work, took
them out of dire poverty, and restored their faith in government. he redefined the relationship of the federal government for the people of our nation. he combated citizens, fear, and despair. he reinvigorated democracy, he transformed our country and that is exactly what we have to do today. and by the way, almost everything he propose, almost every program, every idea he introduced was called socialist. [applause].
i thought i would mention that just -- social security which all of you know transformed life to senior citizens in this country was defined by his opponents as socialist. the concept of the minimum wage that workers had to be paid at least a certain amount of money for their labor was seen as a radical intrusion into the marketplace and was described as socialist. on employment insurance, when you lose your job you have something to fall back upon, abolishing child labor, and in the fact that children of eight, 10, 12, 12 years of age were working in factories and working in the fields.
they were working 40 hours work week, collective bargaining, the rights of workers to engage in the negotiation with the union. strong banking regulations, deposit insurance, and job programs that put millions of people to work were all described in one way or another as socialist periods yet, as you all know all of these programs and many more have become the fabric of our nation and in fact, the the foundation of our middle class. thirty years later, after roosevelt's speech in the 1960s, president lyndon johnson fought for medicare and medicaid to provide healthcare to millions of senior citizens
and families with children, persons with disabilities, and some of the most vulnerable people in this country. today, medicare does not seem to be such a terrible radical idea to say that when someone gets old they should have medical insurance. but when it was proposed, once again we heard right winged forces describe these programs as socialistic and a threat to the american way of life. that was then, now it's now. today, in the year 2015 despite the wall street crash of 2008 which drove this country into the worst economic downturn since the great depression, the american people are clearly better off economically than they were in 1937.
but, here is a very hard truth that we must acknowledge, we must addressed, we must not sweep under the rug. that is, despite a huge increase in technology, and i can remember back i was mayor of the city of burlington, vermont. vermont. is anyone here from vermont? [applause]. okay. and while i was mayor in the 19 eighties, radical development took place. we got computers in city hall. okay. 1980. despite a huge increase in technology and worker productivity, meaning every worker in america with that technology is producing more than workers who came before. despite major growth in our gdp
and a huge increase in the global economy, tens of a millions of american families continue today to lack basic necessities of life, while millions more struggle every day to provide a minimal standard of living for their family. i hope none of you will turn your back on that reality. the truth is, and again this is a truth we must put on the table. yes, we are better off today economically than we were seven years ago when bush left office. but the other truth is, that for the last 40 years on their republican leadership and democratic leadership, the great middle-class of our country has been in decline and faith in our
political system is extremely low. new technology, increase worker productivity, people work longer hours for lower wages, faith in our political system now extremely low. the very rich get richer. almost everyone else gets poorer. super pacs funded by billionaires by elections. coke brothers brothers alone and a few of their friends will spend more money in this election cycle than either the democratic or republican party. ordinary people, working people, young people don't vote. we have an economic and political crisis in this country
and the same old, same old politics and economics will not effectively address this crisis. if we are serious about transforming our country, and i hope all of you are serious about transforming our country, if we are serious about rebuilding the american middle class, if we are serious about reinvigorating american democracy, we need to develop a political movement which once again is prepared to take on and defeat a ruling class whose greed is destroying our nation. [applause].
now, i know that terms like ruling class are probably not talk too often here at georgetown. [applause]. not too often talked about on cbs or nbc, but that is the simple fact. in my view, the billionaire class must be told loudly and clearly that they cannot have it all, that our government belongs to all of us, not just a handful of billionaires. [applause]. this goes beyond politics.
we need to create a culture, an entire culture, which is pope francis has reminded us, cannot just be based on the worship of money, we must not accept a nation in which a billionaires compete as to the size of their super yachts while children in america go hungry and veterans, men and women who put their lives on the life to defend our country sleep out on the street. today in america we are the wealthiest nation in the history of the world. but few americans know that. so much of the new income and wealth is going to the people on top. in fact, over the last 30 years
there has been a massive redistribution of wealth. the problem is it hasn't gone in the wrong direction. mac the last 30 years we have seen trillions of dollars go from the hands of working families of the middle class to the top one tenth of 1%. a handful of people, top one tenth of 1% who have seen a doubling of the percentage of the wealth that they own during that period. unbelievably and grotesquely the
top one tenth of 1% today owns nearly as much wealth as the bottom 90%. one tenth of 1% owns nearly as much wealth as the bottom 90%. that is not the kind of america that we should accept. [applause]. did i tell you that in my state of vermont and all over this country it is absolutely not uncommon to see people working two jobs or three jobs to cobble together the income and healthcare they and their families need. in fact, americans work longer hours than do the people of any
other industrialized country. but despite the fact that our people are working so hard, i go around the country and i see a lot of working people. you can see the stress and exhaustion on their faces. they're they're working crazy hours. husband hardly see wives. people don't have quality time with their kids because they are working so hard just to bring in the income to survive. despite despite all of that, despite people working so hard, 58% of all new income generated today is going to the top 1%. today in america as the middle class continues to dissipate ., median family income is $4100 less hundred dollars less than it was in 1999. the median male worker made over
$700 less than he did 42 years ago in an inflation-adjusted. you you know why people are angry? they are angry because they are working terribly hard. yet, in real inflation-adjusted for dollars they are earning less. they are looking all over her and say what is happening? why is that? but it is not just men, last year the median female worker earned more than $1000 less less than she did in 2007. 58% of all new income goes to the top 1%. today in america the wealthiest country in the history of the world, that that is what we are today. more than half of all the workers have zero retirement savings. think about that, you are 50, 55 years of age and you are
thinking okay, how my going to retire? because my wages have gone down i have zero in the bank for retirement. at the same time, all over america you have millions of seniors and people with disabilities trying to survive on 12 or $13000 per year social security. from vermont to california, all of the workers are scared to death and they are saying how my going to retire with dignity? i want all of you to get your calculators out, not now, when you leave here, do some arithmetic. try to put yourself in the place of a senior citizen in my state of vermont work it's cold in the winter. try to survive survive on $13000 per year. you tell me, how are you are going to pay for the food that you need, heat your home, and by the medicine that you need. you know what?
you can't do it. today in america, nearly 47 million people are living in poverty and to over 20% of our children, including 36% of african-american kids are living in poverty. the highest rate of childhood poverty of almost any nation on earth. what i want you to think about is why is it, in the wealthiest country in the world where we are seeing the proliferation of millionaires and billionaires, we have the highest rate of childhood poverty of almost any major country on earth. today in america, 29 million americans have no health insurance and even more are underinsured with outrageously high copayments and deductibles. in other words, people do have
insurance but i talked to people every day. they have a $5000 deductible, 8000-dollar deductible. they can't go to the dr. when they need. on top of that, for a wide friday of reasons our people pay the highest prices in the world for prescription drugs. doctors tell me all of the time, we prescribe something, medicine for our patients they can't afford to fill that medicine, that prescription. prescription. one out of five americans cannot afford to fill the prescription. what insanity is that? today in america, youth unemployment and underemployment is over 35 percent. for. for african-american kids it is over 50%. meanwhile, we have more people in jail than any other country. china, communists country, four
times our size, we have we have more people in jail than china. countless lives are being destroyed as we stand $80 billion a year locking up our fellow americans. the bottom line is that today in america we not only have massive wealth and income equality, but a power structure built around that inequality which protects those who have the money. today, a handful of super wealthy campaign contributors have enormous influence over the political process while their lobbyists determine much of what goes on in congress. any member of the united states house or senate who is prepared
to tell you the truth, will tell you exactly that. now in 1944, in his state of the union speech, president roosevelt outlined what he called a second bill of rights. you you are all familiar with our bill of rights and what roosevelt outlined was what he called a second bill of rights. this is, in my view, one of the more important speeches ever made by a president's. unfortunately it has not gotten the attention that it deserves. so, i am i am going to give it some attention today. in his remarkable speech, this is what roosevelt stated, and i quote. >> we have come to a clear realization of the fact that
true individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence. men and women are not free men and women and of quote. in other words, real freedom must include economic security. that was roosevelt's vision 70 years ago, it is my vision today, it is a vision that we have not yet achieved, and it is time that we did. [applause].
in that speech roosevelt described the economic rights, rights that he believed every american was entitled to. the right to a decent job at decent pay. the right to adequate food. the right to clothing, and time off of work. the right for every business, large business, large and small, to function in an atmosphere free from an unfair competition and domination by monopolies. the right of all americans to have a decent home and decent healthcare. what roosevelt was stating in 1944, what martin luther king jr. stated in similar terms 20 years later, and what i believe
today is that true freedom does not occur without economic security. people are not free, they are not truly free when they are unable to feed their family. they are not truly free when they are unable to retire with dignity, they are not truly free when they are unemployed, underemployed, or when they are exhausted by working 60, 70 hours per week. people are not truly free when they don't know how they will get medical help when they or family member are sick. so let me take this opportunity to define for you simply and straightforwardly what democratic socialism means to me. it means building on what
franklin delano roosevelt said when he fought for guaranteed economic rights for all americans. it is built on what martin luther king jr. said in 1968 when he stated, and i quote, this country has socialism for the rich and rugged individualism for the poor, and of quote. [applause]. my view of democratic socialism builds on the success of many other countries around the world. who have done a far better job than we have in protecting the
needs of their working families, their elderly citizens, their children, their sick, and their port. democratic socialism means that we must reform a political system which is corrupt, that we must create an economy that works for all, not just the very wealthy. democratic socialism in my mind speaks to a system which, for example during the 1980s -- i want you to hear this, allowed wall street to spend $5 billion over a ten-year period in lobbying and campaign contributions in order to get deregulated. they wanted the government off of their backs, they wanted to do what ever they wanted to do,
spent $5 billion over a ten-year period on lobbying and cut campaign contributions. then, ten years later after their greed and recklessness and illegal behavior led to their collapse, what our system enabled them to do was to get bailed out by the united states government's which through congress and the feds provided trillions of dollars in aid to wall street. in other words, wall street used their wealth and power to get congress to get there bidding for deregulation. then, when wall street collapsed they used their wealth and power to get bailed out. quite a system.
then, to add insult to injury we were told that not only were the banks too big to fail, we were told the bankers were too big to jail. [applause]. and this is the system, young people who get caught possessing marijuana, they get police records and many hundreds of thousands of them have received police records which have impacted their lives in very serious ways. on the other hand, if wall street ceos who helped destroy the economy, they don't get police records, they get raises and their salaries.
this is what doctor mount luther king junior meant when he talked about socialism for the rich and rugged individualism for everyone else. in my view it is time we had democratic socialism for working families, not just for wall street, billionaires, and large corporations. it means we should not be providing welfare for corporations. it means we should not be providing huge tax breaks for the wealthiest people in this country or trade policies which boost corporate profits while they result in workers losing their job. it means that we created governments which works for all of the american people not just powerful special interests. it means that economic rights
must be an essential part of what america stands for. among many other things it means that healthcare should be a right of all people, not a privilege. [applause]. there are some people out there who think this is just an ink credibly radical, if the united states of america all of us having healthcare is a right. i hope all of you know this is not a radical idea, it is a conservative idea. it is an idea and practice that
exists in every other major country on earth. not just in scandinavia, denmark, sweden, it exists in canada. i live live 50 miles away from canada. not a radical idea, it exists in france, germany, taiwan, all over the world. countries have made the determination that all of their people are entitled to health care and i believe the time is long overdue for the united states to join the rest of the world. [applause]. for all single-payer program which i support would not only guarantee healthcare for all people, not only save middle-class families and our
entire nation significant sums of money, because all of you should know that our healthcare system is by far the most expensive per capita of any system on earth, but a medic carried medicare for all single-payer program would radically improve the life of all americans and bring about significant improvements in our economy. think about it. people who get sick will not have to worry about paying a deductible or making a copayment. radical idea, when they are sick they can actually go to the dr.. and not and up in the emergency room at a much greater expense to the system. think about it, business owners will not have to spend enormous amounts of time worrying about how they'll provide healthcare for their employees. think about it.
we don't talk about this very much, you got millions of workers in this country who are staying on jobs, in jobs, which they do not want to stay in but they are there because they have a decent healthcare program for themselves and for their families. think what it means, when young people or anybody else can say you know what, this is the job that i love. this is is what i want to do and i'm going to get out and start this business and do this work. i don't have to worry about healthcare because all of us in america have healthcare. [applause]. by the way, what a medicare for
all system would bring about is ending the absurdity of the american people pain by far the highest prices in the world for prescription drugs. now when i talk about democratic socialism what that means to me is that in the year 2015, a college degree today is equivalent to what a high school degree was 50 years ago. what that means is that public education must today allow every person in this country to have, who has the ability, qualifications and desire, the right to go to a public college or university to for free. [applause].
this a radical socialistic idea? i don't think so. it exists it exists in many countries all over the world. you know what? it used to exist in the united states of america. he had great universities like university of california, virtually tuition free. democratic socialism means that our government does everything he can to create a full employment economy. it makes far more sense to me to put millions of people back to work rebuilding our crumbling infrastructure that to have a real unemployment rate of almost 10%. it is far smarter to invest in jobs and educational
opportunities for young people who are unemployed then to lock them up and sit in jails and incarceration. [applause]. democratic socialism means if someone works 40 hours per week that person should not be living in poverty, that we must raise the minimum wage to a living wage, $15 per hour over the next several years [applause]. it means that we join the rest of the world and pass the very
strong paid family medical leave administration now sitting in congress. [applause]. i want you to think about this, i really want you to see what goes on in our country. it is not only that every other major country, virtually every country in the world, poor countries, small countries, reach the conclusion that one a woman has a baby she should not be forced to be separated from that newborn baby after a week or two and have to go back to work. make it so moms and dads can stay home and get to love their babies. it is a family value that we
should support. that is why i want to and will fight to end the absurdity of the united states being one of the only countries on earth that does not guarantee at least three months of paid family medical leave [applause]. democratic socialism to me means that we have government policy, strong government policy which does not allow the greed and profiteering of the fossil fuel industry to destroy our environment and our planets [applause].
it means to me that we have a moral responsibility to come back on training combat climate change and leave this planet healthy and habitable for kids and grandchildren. [applause]. democratic socialism means that in a democratic civilized society, the wealthiest people in the largest corporations must pay their fair share of taxes. [applause]. yes, innovation, innovation, entrepreneurship, and business success should be rewarded, but greed for the sake of greed is not something that public policy should support.
[applause]. it is not acceptable to me that in the last two years, 15 of the wealthiest people in this country, 15 people, saw their wealth inc. crease in this rigged economy by 170,000,000,000 dollars. and $70 billion. got it. two years. fifteen people, $170 trillion that is more wealth than is owned by the bottom 130 million americans. let us not forget what pope francis has so elegantly stated. we have created new idols, the worship of the golden task of
old has found a new and heartless image in the cult of money and dictatorship of an economy which is faceless and lacking in truly humane goal. in other words, we have got to do better than that. it is not a political issue, not economic issue, it is a culture issue. we have got to stop worshiping people who make billions, billions, and billions of dollars. while we have the highest rate of childhood country entrée poverty in the country. when people put their money in the caymans to avoid it is not acceptable that hedge fund managers pay a lower effective tax rate then nurses are truck drivers. it is not acceptable that billionaire families are able to leave virtually all of their
wealth to their families without pain a reasonable estate tax. it is not acceptable that wall street speculators are able to gamble trillions of dollars into the market without pain a nickel in taxes on that speculation. democratic socialism to me does not just mean that we must create a nation of economic and social justice and environmental sanity. of course it it does mean that. but it also means that we must create a vibrant democracy based on the principle of one per person one vote. it is extremely sad and i hope all of you will pay a lot of attention to this issue, it is extremely sad that the united states, one of the oldest, most stable democracies in the world
has one of the lowest of voter of any major country and that millions of young people and working people have given up on the political process entirely. in the last midterm election, just one year ago, 63% of the american people did not vote. 80% of young people did not vote. clearly, just under and despite the effort of many republican governors who want to suppress the vote to make it harder for people of color to participate in the political system, our job together is to make it easier for people to vote not harder for people to vote. commack it is not a radical idea
that i will fight for this as hard as i can as presidents, to say that everyone in this country who is 18 years of age or older is registered to vote. end of discussion. [applause]. so, the next time you hear me attack a socialist, like tomorrow. [laughter] , remember this i do not believe government should take over the grocery store down the street, our own means of production but i do believe the middle class and the working families of this country, who produce the wealth of this country deserve a decent
reform that gives hispanics and others a pathway to citizenship and a better life. [applause]. while i'm on that subject let me just mention a word of concern. this is what i've been hearing from the republican candidates. people can have honest disagreements about immigration or anything else. it's called democracy. but people should not be using the political platform to inject racial criticisms into the debate. if donald trump and others
referred to latinos and people from mexico as criminals and rapists, if they want to open that door, our job is to shut that door and shut it tight. [applause]. this country has gone too far, too many people have suffered, and too many people have died. we don't want to continue hearing racist words coming from political leaders. i do believe in american idealism. one of the real pleasures and
joys that i have experienced on this campaign so far, being here with you, is seeing the huge numbers of young people who are coming out, who want to make this country better and use their intelligence and their energy to address the many problems that we have. i want to thank all of the young people here and all over the country for their idealism, and do not, do not, do not become cynical. i am not running for president he cuts it is my turn. i come from a working-class family in brooklyn. i've got brooklyn, i've got vermont and by the way i visited california. [applause]. in seriousness, it is not quite
my turn. that is not why i am running for president, but i am running in order for all of us to be able to live in the nation of hope and opportunity, not for some, but for my seven grandchildren and for all of you. nobody understood better the connection between the american strength at home and our ability to defend america around the world. that is why he proposed a second bill of rights in 1944 and he said in that very same state of union, america's own rightful place in the world, depends on large part upon how fully these and similar rights have been carried into practice for all our citizens. unless there is security here at home, there cannot be lasting
peace in the world. i am not running for president to pursue reckless adventures abroad but to rebuild america's strength at home. i will never hesitate to defend this nation, but i will never send our sons and daughters to war under false pretenses or pretenses about dubious battles with and insight. with no end in sight. >> as we discussed, all of you shared with me your shock and horror about what happened in paris and you sent with me your
condolences for the families who lost loved ones in your hopes and prayers that those who were wounded will recover. also those same thoughts go out to the families to those who lost loved ones in the russian flight that we believe was taken down by an isis bomb and also those who lost their lives to terrorist attacks in lebanon and elsewhere. in my mind it is clear that we must pursue policies that destroy the brutal and barbaric isis regime. we must create conditions that prevent extremist ideologies from flourishing. we cannot and should not do it alone. our response must begin with an understanding of past mistakes and missteps in our previous approaches to foreign policy.
it begins with the acknowledgment that unilateral military action should be a last resort, not a first resort. [applause]. and that ill-conceived military decisions, such as the invasion of iraq, can wreak far-reaching devastation and destabilization of global regions for decades. [applause]. it begins with the reflection that the failed policy decisions of the past, rushing to war, regime change in iraq, and in
1953 when they got rid of the president to protect british petroleum interest, iran came in with the brutal dictator and he was thrown out by the islamic revolution and that is where we are in a rant today. in iran today. decisions have consequences. whether it was saddam hussein or the brazilian president in 1964, the chilean president in 1973, this type of regime change, this type of overthrowing governments we may not like often does not work, often makes a bad and difficult decision even worse. these are lessons we must learn.
[applause]. the european nations after world war ii, we est. nato, the north american treaty organization. an organization based on shared interest and goals and the notion of a collective offense against a common enemy. it is my belief that we must expand on these ideals and solidify our commitment to work together to combat the global threat of terrorism. we must create a new organization like nato to
confront the security threats of the 21st century. an organization that emphasizes cooperation, collaboration and to defeat the rise of violent extremism, and importantly, to address the root causes underlying these brutal acts. we must work with our nato partners. we must work to expand the coalition with russia and we must work with members of the arab fleet. but let us be very clear, while the united states and other western nations have the strength of our militaries, and our political systems, the fight against isis is a struggle for the soul of islam, and countering violent extremism, and destroying isis must be done primarily by muslim nations with a strong support of their global partners. [applause].
now this has been my view long before paris and i am very happy to tell you that these same sentiments have been echoed by others in a speech just on sunday in which it was said that terrorism is the greatest threat to our region, the gulf region, region, the middle east, and that muslims must lead the fight against it. he noted that confronting extremism is both a regional and international responsibility and that his incumbent on muslim nations and communities to confront those who seek to hijack their societies and the religion with generations of intolerance and violent ideology.
let me congratulate him not only for his wise remarks, but also for the role that his small country is playing in attempting to address their horrific refugee crisis in that region. [applause]. a new and strong coalition, erecting power and muslim nations and countries like russia must come together in a strongly poor needed way to combat isis, to seal the borders that fighters are currently flowing across, to share counter terrorism intelligence, to turn off the spigot of terrorist financing and to and support for exploiting their ideology.
we must ask more from those countries in the gulf region. while jordan, turkey, egypt and egypt and lebanon, in their own ways, have accepted their responsibilities for taking in syrian refugees, other countries in the region have done nothing or very little. of equal importance, and this is a point that may make some people uncomfortable, but it is a point that must be made. countries in the region like saudi arabia, kuwait, qatar, countries of enormous wealth and resources have contributed far too literal in the fight against isis. that must change.
[applause]. king abdullah is absolutely right when he said the muslim nation must lead the fight against isis and that includes some of the most wealthy and powerful nations in the region who, up to this point, have done far too little. saudi arabia, turns out has the third largest defense budget in the world. instead of fighting isis, they they are focused more on a campaign to oust iran back to rebels in yemen. kuwait, a country whose ruling family was restored to power by the united states driving saddam hussein out of kuwait, has been
a well-known, people in kuwait have been well known sources of finances for isis and other violent extremism. it has been reported that qatar will spend up to $200 billion on the 2022 world cup including the construction of a large number of facilities to host that event. $200 billion to host a soccer event but very little to fight isis. worse still, it has been widely reported that the government there has not been vigilant in stemming the flow of terrorist financing and that qatari individuals and organizations funnel money to some of the most extreme terrorist groups in the region.
all of this has got to change. wealthy and powerful muslim nations in the region can no longer sit on the sidelines and expect the united states, our young men and women and our taxpayers, to do it for them. they have got to come up to the plate. [applause]. as we develop a strongly coordinated effort, we need a commitment from these countries that the fight against isis takes precedent over the religious and ideological differences that hampel the kind of cooperation that we need. further we all understand that ashad, president of syria is a brutal dictator who has slaughtered many of his own people. i am pleased that we saw last weekend diplomats from all over
the world, known as the international serious support group set a timetable for a syrian led political transition that would open a fair election. these are the promising beginnings of a collective effort to end the bloodshed and move toward a political transition in syria. the diplomatic plans for a sod's transition from power is a good step in a united front, but our major priority must be to defeat isis. nations all over the world, world, who share a common interest in protecting themselves against international terrorism, must make the destruction of isis the highest priority. nations in the region must insist that instead of turning a blind eye, they they will commit their resources to preventing the free flow of terrorist
financing and fighters to iraq. we need a commitment that they will count on the violent rhetoric that fuels terrorism and that often occurs within their borders. this is the model that we must pursue in order to address the global threats that we face. while while individual nations, obviously have historic dispute, the united states and russia now have very strong differences of opinion on some very serious issues, iran iran and saudi arabia do not like each other. but the time is now to do everything possible to put aside those differences, to work toward a common goal of destroying isis. sadly as we have seen recently, no country is immune from attacks by the violent organization called isis, thus
we must work with our partners in europe, southeast asia and other areas, asking the hard questions whether their actions are serving our unified purpose. the bottom line is, isis must be destroyed but it cannot be defeated by the united states alone. a new and effective coalition must be formed with the muslim nations leading the effort on the ground while the united states and other forces provide the support they need. let me conclude by once again inking all of you for being here today. all across this country there is a significant alienation from the political process. people look to washington and they throw their hands up and
they say what in god's name is going on. why aren't our senators and congressmen paying attention to our needs?? why are we developing a rational form policy rather than talking again about getting involved in a quagmire in the middle east that could lead to potential warfare? let me conclude by saying this. the problems that we face as a nation are indeed very, very serious. i talked on some but there's a lot we haven't even touched on. by and large all of these problems were caused by bad human decisions. if we, together, if we stand together if we do not allow ourselves to be divided up by race and weather were gay or straight or born in america or not born in america, weather
whether were male or female, if we stand together and if we focus on how we can create foreign policy and how we can rebuild the middle class, how we can combat climate change, how we can create a nation in which we and racism and homophobia, if we are prepared to do that, if you as young people are prepared to engage in the political process, i have no doubt that there is nothing, nothing that together we cannot accomplish. thank you all very much [applause].
[applause]. >> senator again, we can't think you enough for being here today. the institute of politics and public service invited all the major candidates and it's a testament to your vision that you were the first to accept our invitation. thank you for being here it's clearly you have a lot of friends in this room. let's get right into it. we received a lot of questions from students as they were waiting in line in the rain this
morning. you covered a lot of ground, not surprisingly, the questions are very good. i'm not adding to these questions, i'm going to group some together though where they were on a common theme. let's begin with the central premise with the first part of your remarks. that was a discussion of democratic socialism. your remarks, you did a a very good job of describing what it means to you, what as you know senator there is a lot of confusion just around the word. robert frantz, a freshman from brooklyn who specifically asked me to shout out brooklyn, asked why do you choose to identify as a socialist when it seems in your platform you are more in the middle of the spectrum between capitalism and socialism. a freshman from paris france in the school of foreign service
says, in france there is no problem with the word socialist. i consider myself a socialist and i feel the culture pushes you to call yourself a democratic socialist although i can't see the difference. these two questions alone shows some of the differences in how people view the word and you. i'm wondering if you would comment to that and maybe discuss that confusion and clarify just a little bit. >> i think the reason that i have always, way back when i was mayor of burlington, define myself as a democratic socialist is that in fact is my vision. my vision is not just making modest changes around the edge, it is transforming american society to make it into a much more vibrant democracy and an economy which works much better
for working families. by the word socialism, what is implicit in that she to me is that it is imperative that if we are serious about change, and a lot of people want change but at the end of the day real change does not take place unless we have the courage to take on the very powerful special interest that control our country that's my view. not everybody here may agree with me and most people in congress would not. but i think at the end of the day, what we have got to recognize is not just that we are experiencing mass income and wealth inequality or declining middle-class, but a small number of people have extraordinary power and if we are not prepared to take them on and to tell them that they cannot run the
government for their own interest, the real change that many of us want will never take place. when i use the word socialist and i i know some people aren't comfortable with that, i think that is imperative that we create a political revolution that millions of people get involved in the political process and that we create a a government that works for all, not just a few. [applause]. >> staying on this topic for at least one more question, david, a sophomore from quito ecuador rights when margaret thatcher once said that a socialist always run out of other peoples money. how will your policies create wealth policies so that their
long-term sustainability rather than depending on the redistribution of wealth westmont. >> given the fact that we have seen trillions of dollars being transferred in the last 30 years from the middle class to the top 1%, we start from a position that there is already a lot of money out there. that is an important point that has to be made. we are not a poor country. we are the wealthiest country in the history of the world and we should be doing a lot better for our working people and we should not have 47 million people living in poverty. but how do you create wealth? wealth has to be created. one of the points that i made in my remarks, i believe that we significantly strengthen our economy by having a medicare for all single-payer system which will free millions of people to get involved in creating businesses and in creating jobs which today are trapped at work only because they get the health
insurance that that employer is now providing. i think that if you have a a trade policy, not designed by corporate america to shut down plants in america and move abroad, but a trade policy which works for the american worker, you can create, over a. of years millions of decent paying jobs. i believe that when you raise the minimum wage to $15, which is only the right thing to do, as roosevelt talked about in the 1930s, when you put money into the hands of people who have no disposable income, they will take that money, spend it and create jobs. i think the policies that i am advocating will in fact create wealth and strengthen the economy. these are diametrically opposed and opposite so this trickle down theories that say if we give tax breaks, somehow or
another that will benefit the middle-class middle class and the poor. history has been very clear that is a false doctrine. it hasn't worked. [applause]. >> i think i probably be run off campus if i didn't move to this cup topic next and it's one that you touched on in your remarks, and that is the cost of college tuition. julia friedman, a freshman from albuquerque, new mexico, asked under your plan to reduce the cost of college will attacks on wall street speculation be sufficient to cover the cost of the plan. and a freshman in the business school from tallahassee rights, as many of us know, one of your main policies is to make all public universities tuition free. in the united states many of the greatest universities are private universities. how do you plan to combat the
hype price of private universities? >> that's an excellent question. first thought, the answer to the first question is yes. the legislation i have introduced does a number of things. it makes public colleges and universities free and addresses the significant crisis in this country where millions of people are paying high interest rates on their student debt. i suspect some of you will be graduating deeply in debt. i see at least one person. i suspect there are many more so what we do are two things we also say it is a little bit crazy that today you have many people out there who are paying interest rates on their student debt at six, eight, 10% and can refinance our homes at three or 4%. how legislation does is allow people the ability and the freedom to get the lowest
possible interest rates on their debt that they can get and that will save people all over this country many, many billions of dollars. now if the ad goes together, free tuition and lowering interest rates, it cost about $70 billion a year. yes it can be paid for by a tax on wall street speculation. second point about private universities. of course we know that georgetown and many other private universities do an extraordinary job and we are proud of the quality of education they provide. our legislation includes substantially increasing pell grants to make sure that working class and lower income families, middle-class families can get the help they need if they choose to send their kids here to georgetown or harvard or anyplace else. we also significantly increased
student work programs so that universities can have funds available to employ students on campus. your point is well taken. our legislation also makes our private colleges and universities less expensive [applause]. let's move to the second portion of your speech. >> a junior from denver asks with your strong belief in pacifism how would you address the recent and escalating violence of isis as being at democratic state entail opening orders to refugees? and a freshman from bethesda asked, more generally, how will you ensure the safety of the american people? >> first let me respond to the
first question. i have a lot of respect for people who may be pacifists. i am not a pacifist. what in fact i voted against the very first gulf war. i think history will record that as the right vote. then in 2002 after listening to bush and cheney and donald rumsfeld, and listening carefully to what they had to say, i concluded they were not telling the truth and i voted against the war in iraq. [applause]. but i did vote for the war in afghanistan because i thought that osama bin laden should be held accountable and i did vote for president clinton's effort to end the ethnic cleansing.
no i am not a pacifist. i think that war should be the last resort, but we have the strongest military on earth and of course we should be prepared to use it when it is necessary. in terms of where we are right now, i think the main point i tried to make it my remarks is i think it would be a terrible mistake for many reasons for the united states virtually unilaterally to get involved in the war in syria were re- involved in the war in iraq. the nightmare is that we send our troops in there in combat and they come back in caskets. we send more troops and the plane gets shot down and we send more planes in. twenty or 30 years from now we are still talking about how we get out in that region of the world. i agree very strongly with king abdullah who is absolutely right
what is going on there is a struggle for the soul of islam. there are millions and millions and millions of muslims who detest and are disgusted with what isis and other extremist groups are doing but now they are going to have to get into the process. it is their troops that are going to have to be on the ground. we should be supportive and i support president obama's efforts with airstrikes and special forces, but the leadership must come from the muslim nation. in terms of how we protect our country, obviously we have got to be super vigilant against terrorist attack. i know there is a lot of discussion about refugee. let me say word on that. i am not happy to hear what i have heard in recent days about people who are talking about going into or maybe closing down
mosques in america. i am not happy about hearing that we should close our borders to men women and children who have been displaced and driven out of their homes because of terrorism. i believe that yes, after thorough screening which we have the capability of doing, working with the rest of the world we should accept refugees from that region. that is the moral thing to do. excepting refugees is what america has always done and i think it's improper to turn our backs on those people now. >> the next couple of questions grouped together come from something that i think created a lot of buzz. it's something you said in the debate. it's about climate change and specifically it is linked to terror and terrorism.
jonathan, a freshman in the business school writes about elaborating on your plan to address it? >> obviously, as i hope i made clear this afternoon, organizations like isis and terrorist organizations are a major threat. threat. they have got to be destroyed. but if you look into the future, this is not bernice sanders, this is the cia in the defense department and countries all over the world. this is what they are saying. if we do not get our act together, if there is more drought around the world if there is more flooding, if there are more extreme weather disturbances, if sea levels continue to rise and flood coastal regions, there will be a massive displacement of people
people need water. people need land to grow their crops and if they do not have that land they are going to migrate. they are going to be in competition with other people for limited natural resources. when that happens, according to the cia, according to our own defense department, that lays the groundwork for international conflict. in my view it is not debatable. of course climate change is a major inducement for international conflict and also to terrorism. for example, right now, in, in syria as a result of a sustained drought, people have left the rural areas flooded into the cities causing more instability and becoming people who can succumb to extremist propaganda.
so what we have to do, do, and by the way, when i was your age the challenge of my generation was civil-rights. all over this country, and when i was at the university of chicago, young people stood up and said were going to and to segregation in america, and those of us who were northern schools and our brothers and sisters in the south were getting their heads busted open but we did what we could where we were. one of your great challenges today, continue to fight against racism and sexism and homophobia, but also understand that we are fighting for the future of the planet. if we do not move aggressively, i'm on the energy committee and
i talk to scientists all over the world. what they are telling us is we have a small window of opportunity to transform our energy system away from fossil fuel into energy efficiency and sustainable energy. we need to take on the fossil fuel industry who are looking at short-term profits ahead of the future of this planet. i hope you will be involved in that effort to transform our energy system. [applause]. >> senator i know you have to leave momentarily so i want to close with one last grouping. i think it's an important one because it gets very much at the whole notion of why our institute exists in one of the big points you brought up at the conclusion of your remarks is how do we get this done? us sophomore says, with the
republican majority in both houses, would you be willing to compromise to get your most important plans past and a freshman from san francisco asked how do you plan on implementing your social program given the immense opposition in congress? >> great questions when you are in congress i definition you compromise every day. you all should know that when i was in the house of representatives, i was there for 16 years i ended up getting more amendments passed on the floor than any other member of congress. when there was an issue out there that i could work with republicans on and they were the majority, we put together a pretty good coalition. just two years ago i worked as chairman of the u.s. senate committee on veteran affairs. i work with people like john mccain in the senate and people like just mill miller to put together the most comprehensive
bill passed in recent history. so the point is yes i can compromise. on many of the issues that i have talked about, but virtually all of them, these are not radical extremist ideology. i'm not coming before the american people saying i am this radical, wild eyed socialist with crazy ideas and listen to me. that's not the issue. look at the issues. we want to raise the minimum wage to $15 per hour. raising the minimum wage wisely popular. we want to create 13 million jobs by rebuilding our crumbling infrastructure. making public colleges and universities tuition free and lowering student debt, widely popular. combating climate change, there
are some republicans who still don't accept it but most americans do. asking the rich to start paying their fair share of taxes. vast majority of americans think that is right. here's my point, the real question is sure, you have a compromise, but the more important point is why is congress so far out of touch with where the american people are at? the republican agenda is among other things to cut social security, medicare and medicaid and give huge tax breaks to billionaires and ignore the planetary crisis of planet change. how many people believe in that agenda? truly a very small majority of people. when i talk about the political revolution and i talk about transforming american people is
bringing in the voices of millions and millions of people have given up on the political process. to have their views and needs being heard by congress. when that happens, everything that i talked about will be passed. if that does not happen, virtually nothing will be passed. so what this campaign, from my perspective, perspective, is about, it is not just electing bernie sanders to be president, and i do appreciate your support, but it is much more than that because no president, not bernie sanders or anybody else can implement the kinds of changes we need in this country unless millions of people begin to stand up and fight back. i think right here, on college campuses all over the country we are beginning to see that fight back.
we are beginning to see that fight back among low-wage workers were going out into the street saying we can't make it on eight or $9 per hour. raise the minimum wage to $15 per hour. we are beginning to see that movement develop and i hope you will be part of that movement because if you are, we can in fact transform this country. thank you all very much. [applause].
>> all campaign long cspan takes you on the road to the white house. unfiltered access to the candidates at town hall meetings, news conferences, and rallies. work taking your comments on twitter and by phone. every campaign event we cover is available on our website at cspan.org. >> coming up on c-span2, senators debate the administration plans on syrian refugees in the united states. then a hearing on child trafficking. then hillary clinton on her national security agenda and fighting ices. >> on the next "washington journal", frederick kagan of the american enterprise institute. then how law enforcement conduct
surveillance. gordon wiccan on their report on how they deter and punish corruption. "washington journal" is live on c-span. >> on friday a forum on housing issues. our live coverage starts at 845 eastern on c-span2. >> sunday on q&a. >> i i am the first woman to reach the rank of four stars in the united states navy. i had only been a three-star for ten or 11 months. he asked to see me and i
presumed it was about the next job i was going to. that's when he talked to me about looking at me for being a four-star and here's here's a couple different opportunities where we think you would do well and benefit the navy. >> admiral michelle howard. she talks about becoming the first female four-star admiral in the history of the navy. she also discusses her career prior to her current appointment >> i became the head of the counter piracy task force. two days on the job, captain phillips was kidnapped and it was our responsibility to get them back and get them back safely. that was obviously a surprise mission and a challenge and were happy to get him back.
>> next a debate from the senate floor on the administration's plan to handle syrian refugees in the united states. mitch mcconnell and harry reid are the debate leaders. later senator iran paul is speaking about his plan to block amendments to the transportation and hud bill until they plan to block transportation for refugees. this. is 30 minutes.tion >> it's clear that the american people are concerned about the administration's ability to properly that thousands of individuals from syria. more than half of our nation's nation's governors, governors of both parties, have demonstrated their concern. any members in congress, members of both parties, have raised
concern as well. given all of this and all that has happened in paris, it simply makes sense to take a step back for now to press the pauseen button so we can determine the facts and ensure we have the correct policies. and screenings in place. that is the most responsible thing for the administration to do right now.o that's the most reasonable and balanced thing for the administration to do right now.u you should also not lose sight of why we are in this position to begin with. the syrian people are fleeing syria because of a brutal civil war. the ultimate solution to this problem is to make syria a place for syrian people can return to. the administration has never had a coherent strategy to settle the conflict. t every single one of us knows that ices presents a threat to
our homeland and it is not contained. if the administration is serious about starting to turn the situation i around, it needs a serious and workable strategy that can win strong bipartisan support. >> we all know the federal government has many obligationsi the primary responsibility is to protect the american people from harm. ices continues its threat ofcomm terror across the entire world. the united states is committed to combat terrorism. in this fight against evil icesc it is critical we asri americann not lose sight of our
principles. m i can remember taking my family forn the first time. here's what it says. that of course is directed to the united states. all across europe and the middle east there are masses of syrian families who definitely o desperately need to find refuge somewhere. there are about 300,000 who have
been killed since the civil war started. the crisis in syria continues to worsen and people are forced to take refuge. on a daily basis the borders are being flooded by people in search of safety and a better life. others have taken on an enormous influx of refugees as safely as possible. the united states has a rigorous screening process. only 2% 2% of the refugees are men of military age.
the majority are women and children. 2% of those are of military age. the united states has a proud history of providing refuge. that history includes my father-in-law.they his family were refugees. i've been disgusted with the president in recent days who cannot show compassion. i've been disappointed with the bigotry. we cannot repeat the dark dayss of the 1930s when many americans resolved to turn away the helpless refugees from nazi
many germany. or the imprisonment of innocent japanese-americans during world war ii.ple those mistakes were based on these kinds of fears.be how manyca people died because f unfounded apprehension? i don't know, but far toon many. it seems like many are willing to go down that same path agains some suggested that wedida categorically block all syrian refugees. one candidate for president said we should turn away 5-year-old refugees. they are saying only christians. this has become a disturbing pattern of intolerance.
and jews. rights of parties.ing we are at world war with this one. two of my friends serve in the house of representatives. their religion has made them other people. we are suggesting thats on we should reject them based on the grounds of their religion. that is not america. it is up propaganda bonanza
crisis. christian groupsre have respond. we've heard what the pope said. isth blasphemous. we are urging supporters to come back to elected officials on behalf of these victims.n we must pause and think about what they have been through. les think about who are these refugees. they're not our enemies. they are expelled from their homeland by the same evildoers we're fighting. all they want is to find safety to restart their lives. these people have been persecuted and that's an
understatement, by president assad and isis. the syrian regime, i repeat, has barrel bombed their own citizens, unleashed chemical weapons against their own citizens, rapes, justifying the rapes of these hundreds and hundreds of women in the name of their religion. murdering women and children. these refugees hate assad. they hate isis. that's why they're trying to get out of that horrible situation they find themselves. the department of homeland security has verified that not one of the 1,800 refugees already admitted to the united states has a single confirmed tie >>ttacks, t >> the appalling attacks the wht
president of france isday -- qu- refusing and this is what welcod this good man and what the president of france said. that it is a moral thing to do and sound policy. former secretary of state condoleezza rise agreed to those fleeing persecution and here's what she said. we have done in a very careful way the animal -- madeleine albright had an op-ed for "time" magazine.
she herself was a refugee and how she came into the country during world war ii. to respond with compassion to defeat isis. this is no way to win the war here is what she said. madeleine albright with the muslims and non muslims by making it the assyrian refugees the enemy. to murder innocent people to be insured of revalue every human life where we stand''. as secretary rice said that is right reprocess those
refugees and a careful way. we are not the nations of europe. if we have an ocean between us and them. deal mantic ocean. united states refugee screening process will before it comes to our borders. excepting on a referral basis with no gao's soliciting these people was subjected to screening and security checks. it takes an average of 18 or 24 months remember the mass
majority of the people of 24 months when in children and men is 18 to 24 months ago then millions of flown out of syria. survivors of torture and violence of women and children. so these serious refugees are real people. it should be so visually apparent in our minds. that we saw around the world to be washed up on the beach
whose body was washed up on the beach. all the tv programs but then democrats and republicans call compassion in action. we must help or we can. we coming to the defense of the defenseless. right now we are a nation of freedom. we should not forsake our duty or obligation. >> i ask unanimous consent the judiciary committee be discharged from further consideration of the s to 47 the senate proceed to amend it in -- immediate consideration. for the basket re-read a third time and passed. the motion to reconsider the
may debate upon the table. >> is there an objection? >> on behalf of the ranking member and myself i do object. >> the senator from texas. >> basket as consent of the judiciary committee be discharged from further consideration s230 to the senate proceed to the immediate consideration. i asked it re-read the third time and passed and the motion to reconsider will be laid upon the table. >> is there an objection? >> it is heard. >> the senator from texas. >> moments ago i asked this body to pass common sense pieces of legislation in response to terrorist attacks in paris. first in this legislation from over a year ago the democratic party bloc that
provides any american citizen to take up arms against america to wage jihad forfeits her or his citizenship providing for revocation of citizenship this would add joining terrorist groups like isis to those grounds. unfortunately the democratic party has just objected to passing that common-sense legislation. because of that, it means the americans estimates are they have joint isis right now to page jihadi against america. that means they can come back to america using a u.s. passport to wage a. [applause] against this country with
attempts to murder innocent men and women using a u.s. passport that is a profound mistake. the second legislation stops president obama in hillary clinton to bring in tens of thousands assyrian refugees to the united states. in light of the declaration of war of the horrific terrorist attacks and in light of the admission from the director of the fbi said it administration cannot get these refugees if they all have the data on which of the assyrian refugees are involved with isis terrorism they can create a database but there is no information in the database baking query
again and again but they don't have the information. unfortunately the democratic party have chosen to stand with president obama and his absurd political correctness to utter those words radical islamic terrorism. from the president refuses to say those words hillary clinton refuses to say that word but to support a policy to bring tens of thousands up of refugees into this country knowing full well they cannot get them to determine who is here to wage jihad. it is my hope we should stand as one. this should be an area of bipartisan agreement. if it includes the exception of the persecuted minority.
the small minorities facing genocide in response is a different response to attack me directly to say it was an american to protect this country from terrorist to help persecuted christians. yesterday the president attacked again from manila to say it is offensive and i in so many other want to keep our children safe. it is neither an american or offensive to believe to stand up to radical islamic terrorism and it is an astonishing statement that so many democratic senators to is to stand with a president who will not confront radical islamic terrorism. that terrorist attack to
save his understanding -- -- understandable why the attack charlie hebdo. i would say any official to bear responsibility of consequences for their actions. the intent to murder as many as possible. but the common-sense legislation will help to protect the nation alliance sorry to say to protect america first unfortunately my friends on the other side of the dial or blocking better for. i yield the floor.
with the gang rapes and whores we cannot even imagine a few weeks ago the world came together stunned over the image of a three year-old syrian child like this body washed up on the turkish beach. to focus the attention it is these humanitarian issues of today or the proud history of a land of refuge as i have heard so many as well as commentators but those that eat them properly vented syrian and other refugees the people that are shut out of just weeks ago.
of course, we're horrified by what happened in beirut. with a terrorist organization that is what we should be debating. we should be talking about how more countries should be involved in this fight. people fleeing isis are not. we have a discussion among other things to be separated on the terrorist watch list to go to the gun show to break no lot. daybreak the lot. one of those that face the
oklahoma city bombing to buy the components of the bomb they break no lot. >> reserve my time. >> i yield the floor. >> three minutes on each side three minutes on the democratic side to minutes of the republican side. >> the assisted democratic leader. with unanimous consent request made by the junior senator of texas was a bill pending before the senate judiciary committee today he did not attend that meeting that i wish she had. if we wanted to take this up to debate i objected on behalf of myself and other
senators who never address that issue. we will reflect in years to come that what happened in this world. on the terrible tragedy that occurred in paris france that was led by the isis terrorists. with those poor victims that died as a result any also reflect on acts of terrorism to re-emerge from this terrible tragedy on the ground in paris for those who defied the terrorists and those who risk their lives to bring those responsible to justice. show by leaders around the world the president of france announced his country received 35,000 refugees after the attack he made it
clear he would not hold those innocent helpless refugees accountable. when they said they would accept thousands of refugees even after the attacks asia the wisdom and good sense for those helpless victims of terrorism around the world for those who perpetrate terrorist attacks. listen to the debate on capitol hill. the unanimous consent request made this morning it is not consistent with those values. to say we only accept refugees your the victims of genocide the closed doors to cuban refugees coming to the united states of what it meant to their families and close the doors to be persecuted looking for
freedom in coming to the united states as refugees. i can list callous others for the victims' of persecution. there were the victims of terrorism and getting rates. listen to what was said on the other side of the rotunda. it does not merit the kind of appreciation of american values when we make these critical decisions. sometimes rash decisions are made. the i did that in the course of history in the senate and house of representatives. we hope there will not prevail. >> your time has expired. >> the senator from texas. >> the senator from vermont spoke against overheated rhetoric and in the next
breath accuse me of being anti-american heckling the attack president obama gave. let me say speaking the truth of not terrorism my democratic friends invoked the irish and italian grandparents coming to this country they did not pose a terrorist threat they're not looking too innocent citizens he is not a terror threat to murder innocent citizens with the democratic party the vehicle to acknowledge qualitative difference. because the leader of isis in 2009 the obama administration released him as he was released he turned and said ceo in york and the
democratic party cannot distinguish between irish and italian and cuban emigrants then they are ignoring reality. i would now be expatriate terrorist act is very similar to legislation introduced 2010 by democratic senator lieberman and senator brown both are an american as well. at the time clinton -- senator clinton said united states citizenship is privileged it is not a right. those foreign terrorists are clearly in violation up of the health the base floor when they become citizens. to now consider this statement to use the american. said the commander in chief should protect the safety
and security of this country president hollande. >> your time is expired. >> we should protect ourselves every bit as much. >> your time is expired. >> i ask unanimous consent to call what might amendment 2844. >> is there objection? >> the senator from kentucky >> reserving the right to object to over 1,000 meriden's have called out and are concerned about the people of the middle east but we're not sure of their intentions for the boston bombers were here in the refugee program to iraqi refugees came to my state with the intent to buy missiles to attack us for i have asked for a simple amendment placed for a vote that lets the american people vote if we want to
bring more people if we're doing an adequate job screening these people. it is a reasonable request i will have a vote until the american people are clamoring for continued to object. >> i object. >> unanimous consent to bring forward my amendment to limit and end the subsidized housing from the 2843 and i ask unanimous consent that i be allowed to set aside the current business to bring the amendment forward. >> on behalf of myself and the ranking member of the subcommittee, i object. we're in a process where we're trying to clear
amendments and making good progress on this bill. i and a stand senator paul has raised an important issue if it does not belong on this bill and to not progress. we're trying to get back on the appropriations process with full cooperation i am confident that we could finish the important appropriations bill today. we can show the american people that we can govern and to the fund transportation to have the programs that are included in this bill. we have had excellent bipartisan cooperation. i was hoping we could move to the amendment offered by
the senator from texas with the republican leadership by the senate democratic leader the amendment that i believe we could dispense with quickly and you would continue to work through the amendments. so because the senator from kentucky amendment would grind this bill to a halt halt, there will be other opportunities to deal with this issue because the house will be passing legislation this week dealing with the issues raised by the senator said kentuckians will object said kentuckians will object >> your objection is heard. >> i agree with the senior senator from maine that
senator paul has raised with the adequacy of the screening process for refugees coming to our country is a serious matter and one that will be voting on today and my prediction is there is broad bipartisan support for the additional security measures in that bill. but this is a transportation bill and it is important to get our work done. that is appearing to be more and more difficult.
>> we're committed to combating terrorism is impossible to predict the people of america but to combat isis to except the refugees that the terrorists have destroyed. we're during a screening process most refugees as we have learned we're accepting mothers and children. with 2 percent of the refugees.
it is a long proud history and would be shameful to turn our backs. the senators will address other measures like a loophole something that senator feinstein has pioneered. like the background check. it is outrageous dangerous individuals can waltz in with a weapon because republicans with the nra is with these deadly attacks. yesterday at our briefing we heard one of the most urgent things we could do is to lead the efforts to do a cut off funding to the terrorist
after up to 18 to 24 months of careful investigation. these are some of the most carefully vetted people who would ever enter the united states, 70,000 a year. meanwhile about 250,000 come to the united states each day. a third of them come from visa-free countries, visa waiver countries and they come today states that eventually filling out a form. there are is no fingerprint check before they get on an airplane. there thinks they can be done and should be done to make sure that we are safer to the tennis shoe bomber -- using the visa
waiver program. you should be a wake-up call that if we are going to make america safer that is one of the things we should include as a higher priority rather than these refugees. let me also add that i report -- support with jen senator feinstein is doing when it comes to keeping guns out of hands of those that are expected of being terrorists. to think that we have this gap in the law is unimaginable. this man who went to the concert hall in paris used in automatic women -- weapon to kill so many people. wouldn't we want to make certain that kind of person would never be able to buy a firearm and there are the things we should include in this as well and one point i would make, a foreign national with the user waiver program country can buy a plane ticket on line in five minutes and come to our country without submitting any biometric data
like fingerprints. that's a change we should make and by the way of foreign national united states visa waiver program can legally purchase a handgun or assault rifle. the law blocks visa holders from other countries from buying guns in 38 visa waiver countries. if we are going to keep america safe we have to move beyond the conversation on refugees to the real vulnerabilities we face. >> thank you in person want to thank my colleagues here. they are doing a great job of missing on finding real solutions to problems posed by the terrorist attacks. all of us on the stage are focused on two critical goals. first we have to keep terrorists out of the united states. second we need to keep guns and explosives out of the terrorist hands. we need to focus our response where it matters on individuals who are coming here to do us harm.
we need to have tough screening for every refugee from syria who is coming into the united states but at the terrorist is going to try to come into this country they are much more likely to use loopholes in the visa waiver program to do it. instead of waiting two years to go through the refugee screening process. senators feinstein murphy cadwell cardin and others are looking at ways that we will tighten up these loopholes, ensure the passports can't be fake and that terrorists who want to exploit the system can't slip through the cracks. we will talk more about that in a few minutes. we also need to crack down on the indefensible dangerous and frankly ridiculous loopholes that allow people on terrorist watch lists to purchase guns and explosives. senate republicans have dropped their bill to close these loopholes for years recently
introduced by the late senator lautenberg. senate republicans are doing the bidding of their special interest friends in the nra instead of keeping the country safe. and if you say well is this real , over 2000 people have attempted, i'm sorry over 2000 people on a terrorist watch list have attempted to buy guns and 91% have gotten those guns so i have a question for our republican colleagues. why should terrorists are the ones perpetrating, who perpetrated the heinous attacks in paris be allowed to buy a gun when senate republican leaders were asked about this bill earlier this week a the bill senate democrats have tried to pass for years they shrug their shoulders. not good enough. our republican colleagues need to start focusing on the real problem and dangers posed by isis. we urge them to move quickly to
work with us close with polls in the visa waiver program and keep guns out of terrorist hands. >> senator feinstein. >> thank you very much leader and thank you to my colleagues for being here and being part of the team that wants to put together new policies for this country. as has been said simply put we must do more to protect the homeland against any possible terrorist attacks like we saw in paris, beirut and egypt and today has as been said we are talking about just to common sense steps that both political parties should agree on, strengthening the visa waiver program, ensuring that terrorists cannot buy firearms or explosives here in this country. regarding the visa waiver program, this program is important to the business community and the tourism
industry and i have supported it but i also believe it is the soft underbelly of our national security policies. 20 million people each year from 38 countries including france and belgium use the visa waiver program. this means they don't need a traditional visa to travel here and therefore undergo less scrutiny. this means terrorists could exploit the program, could go from france to syria as 2000 fighters have done, come back to france, use the visa waiver program and without further scrutiny comment to the united states. considering there are 45 million lost or stolen travel documents on the global black market today, many of them passports, it's clear we need to reform the
program. the bill we are working on, all of us together, would make several changes. first, anyone who travels to syria or iraq in the last five years cannot travel to the united states using the visa waiver program, period. they can still visit that they need a traditional visa, a process that includes an in person interview at the u.s. embassy in or consulate. second, the bill requires additional information from travelers before they arrived in the united states, to include fingerprints and photographs. each step along the way we want to know the individual traveling here, who is he or she and who do they say they are? third, the bill would require all individuals using the visa waiver program to have a passport within each hip to store our metric data.
this e chip is more secure and harder to tamper with and contains an individual's biometric information. a this is the logo which says it is an electronic passport as well. when i travel, i will present this, which has my photo such as it is, well. [laughter] it has my photo and i will show it to whomever, tsa, homeland security, whoever asks and they can bring up this passport which has my fingerprints and my actual photo. this prevents this passport from being tampered with and these are not traditionally given out in the last five or so years so anyone they get a new passport, it will be with this ability.
countries in the visa waiver program also must do more to enhance security. this means reporting lost and stolen passports to the united states and interpol as well as screening against interpol data, sharing intelligence about foreign fighters. some of this is already happening in sharing biometric information collected during the refugee or asylum process. our bill will be a straightforward solution that can make a real difference. i wanted it to be a bipartisan bill as well. senator flake has agreed to be the lead republican on the bill and we look forward to working with him. we plan to introduce the bill after thanksgiving. the second issue we are addressing is closing a gaping loophole that allows known or
suspected terrorists to legally buy firearms or explosives in our country. in other words they don't have to bring it with them. they can buy it once they get here. i introduced a bill in february which is senator schumer said had been introduced by senator lautenberg to close this loophole. the bill is also introduced in the house by republican congressman peter king. the bill would allow the attorney general to block the sale of explosives are firearms if a purchaser is on a terrorist watch list and they use the firearm in connection with terrorism. i think this is a no-brainer. if you are too dangerous to board a plane, you are too dangerous to buy a gun. language in this bill is identical to language supported by george bushes justice department in 2007 so it's been
around for a long time and it is not a partisan issue. many of us were surprised as chuck has said, to learn how often this loophole is exploited from 2004, 2014, over a ten-year period the gao known as the government accountability office, took a look at this and they report that of the 2000200 33 people on the fbi terrorist watch list, who went through a background check to buy a weapon, of those, 2043 pass that background check and likely purchased a firearm or explosives. now that means that 91% of people on the sei's watch list who try to buy weapons in this country are in fact able to do
so. to me, this is just a shocking statistic and one which might he addressed. so these are two common sense steps that our team wants to go ahead with and we very much hope that republicans will agree, at least enough of them, to get it passed and signed by the president. they both will make a difference. thank you very much leader. [laughter] >> there are everywhere.
[inaudible conversations] [laughter] >> a great segue to talk about technology. [laughter] i am here to say that i believe too that we need to reform the visa waiver probe ram. in 2004 as part of the senate version of the intelligence reform and terrorism prevention act, i sponsored legislation along with several of my colleagues including senator schumer to implement the biometric visa standard distance borders at. grade that legislation was passed by the united states senate and later removed in conference. the impetus for my sponsoring that legislation in washington state where some had entered france through algeria and made an identity with in france to
canada, made a new identity showed up with a carload of explosives on his way to lax. that language while taken out some progress has been made with homeland security and getting biometrics but we feel that more standards need to be put in place. one, we think there should be a phased-in requirements for pre-departure from visa waiver countries, facial recognition standards and fingerprint standards. require all u.s. -- to have the capability to conduct one of the their facial recognition or fingerprint and a store digital photo of the visa waiver countries and faith in the ability to be able to read fingerprints from these visa waiver countries. we are only as strong as the biometrics required by these countries and who they let into their country before they can travel on.
it's also important for our country to work with canada. the same issues exist and we would like all of our partners to be using the same kind of digital recognition in visa waiver programs on state-of-the-art technologies. we should also give homeland security the ability to upgrade every five years the requirement of technology as technology improves. and i also believe that we should require visa waiver countries to share information with us so that we can share information about our watch list and who is on our watch list so that everybody is tracking the same information. i plan to work with our colleagues here today and our colleagues on the other side of the aisle and getting reports as to information and how it is shared with other intelligence agencies. we want to make sure those who
are protecting our borders, particularly the customs and border control, have the most accurate information about people who are coming across our borders and the day to have the ability in case of mr. rouson presented information that was not -- that wasn't on a terrorist watch list and customs and borders racist vision only one big -- only because someone had suspicions and because they had suspicions pull them aside but not based on his immigration papers they were able to look in the truck and find explosions in his car. it's time that we go back in the senate to get in into law before we close the loophole and require better cooperation of all of our countries working together and sharing information so that we know who people say they are and if they are making up new identities we have the ability with good technology to
track that and track them and their travels. >> senator cardin. >> thank you mr. leader. first we'll stand with the people of france with regards to this horrific tragedy that occurred last friday. as the senior democrat on the senate foreign relations committee made clear our mission is not only to degrade that to destroy isil and to keep americans safe so homeland security is protecting the homeland. it's our top rarity. i want to thank the administration. the briefing we received last night confirmed for many of us the importance of our refugee resettlement program. it's part of our international leadership but also pointing out that we have the most rigorous screenings for those who enter our country as refugees than any other group of people who are not americans. it's an incredible screening process. it's not only screening as to
any connections late could have had with terrorist organizations. it would establish that they are at risk of being harmed or killed. the refugees are the victims of terror, they are not terrorists. that came out pretty clearly in the briefing we received last night. obviously we want to make sure that process is as strong as it needs to be. her colleagues have very talked about the visa waiver program. why are we focusing on back? because of the concern about foreign fighters. these are individuals who have traveled to the areas of conflict trained by terrorist organizations such as isil. many of them come from countries and carry passports that are eligible for the visa waiver program. we need to do is my colleagues are suggesting and draft a procedure on screening those who
come from visa waiver countries to make sure that they are not terrorists and they will protect our homeland. that makes common sense so we have to redouble our efforts. in the foreign relations committee at the want to mention there are 28 nominations mr. leader that are on hold. these are noncontroversial appointments that we can't can get done. affects our national security such as tom shannon to be undersecretary. this is a person or place wendy sherman. and david robinson was the assistant secretary for globalization operations. these are examples of republican holds that compromise our national security priorities. >> senator blumenthal and then we'll take some questions. >> when i go home tonight i'm
reminded of my obligation to keep the country safe. reminding me and all of us have those responsibilities. that's why i am glad to talk about to meaningful ways in which we can protect this country. first, it speaks to common sense that those on the terrorist watch list should be able to buy guns. shame on us if we can't find bipartisan common ground to make sure that terrorists are on the same list as criminals of those who are prohibited from buying guns. we also learned last night about the rigorous methodology we used to screen the relatively small numbers of refugees in places like syria. it simply stands to reason that instead of focusing on 2000
highly vetted immigrants we should be focusing on the 20 million likely vetted immigrants to come to this country every year. i am pleased to join senator feinstein to work on legislation on the visa waiver program. there are a number of important information sharing agreements that are pending. the safe harbor agreement, the umbrella law enforcement agreement and those agreements and to be signed in order for the visa waiver program to continue. we need to know that the no-fly list has the best information available to protect americans and the last thing i'll say is this. the notion that we can't both protect americans from terror who have been the victims of terror suggested smallness about america but violates the dash of
this country. i believe in american exceptionalism and is able to secure arab orders and rescue others who have been victims of horrific terrorist attacks. those are the individuals that the refugee program targets. that's why 92% of the refugees that have come in the last year or not single males. they are women and their children, the sick and the frail , those that have been battered, raped and tortured. we can at the same time protect our country and help rescue others who are the victims of torture in terror. >> i want to thank my colleagues for listening and leading. we have been listening to the hundreds of calls and contacts
we have been receiving over this past week and we have attempted to lead, and to look at what is really the challenge and the problem, the loopholes and gaps in our present screening process that must be improved. i'm going to continue working to improve the screening and bedding for refugees across the globe but also to focus on the gaps in the visa waiver program had a net many many more times the numbers of people and potentially dangerous individuals. and we should keep in mind that our obligation here is not simply to respond to the fear of the moment.
if there were a religious test applied to refugees coming to this country i wouldn't be here nor would many of my colleagues and yet that is the kind of rhetoric we have seen over the past few days. i think americans are ready for these kinds of rational commonsense solutions that target terrorists who pose a danger to our country and i'm going to work with my colleagues and i believe there will be bipartisan support. [inaudible] >> i think the appropriate place to focus as the visa waiver
program and the ability of terrorists to buy guns. what they showed us this, that there have been 2000 refugees who have come from syria over the last four years. none have been arrested or deported, none. the overwhelming majority of them are children, women and the elderly. only 2% are single males of military age. on the other hand the visa waiver program has many more people going through it, millions. it takes virtually no time as opposed to 18 to 24 months and there is much less bedding. we need to really tighten up that program so the best way to do it as the tighten up the visa waiver program and close this awful lot that leftover 2 million people who were on terrorist watch lists i guns.
>> has the president been slow to recognize -- and whether he planned on having at least one among the group and does not also pose a threat? >> everyone is checked thoroughly in the refugee programs, everyone, men, children and elderly people so the refugee probe them is really tight. i think the president has done a very good job. i think the way it has to get out as to how good a job he has done both in terms of trying to make a secure but also in terms of progress that we have made in the middle east. a map of territory over the last i think year, the last one year
that isa had a year ago in isil has now is considerably less. it has had a good effect and will continue to on trying to take them myself. i think these things should be publicized so the american people feel secure but i think they have done a good job. >> the language in the hospital candidate fbi -- [inaudible] can you put the language in the house bill? >> the problem is not with refugees. [inaudible] >> don't worry, it won't get past.
>> senator want to ask about what secretary johnson said yesterday. he said some reforms have been applied to the visa waiver program including interpol working with federal air marshals. i'm wondering how you would respond to the secretary. >> is done terrific job and we will discuss any changes we think are appropriate with them. >> yesterday secretary johnson had a briefing and will have input from us and just as we said on that -- that are collected today we think they should be upgraded. we want the facial recognition to happen and we want the data and information shared by all countries so that we know where
people have been traveling. just so people know, this is what the u.s. system for refugees is. it requires a fingerprint standard so we are already requiring it. we know who these people are and we can check them. we want to check them against other documents and information. we need people in these visa waiver countries to actually collect biometrics on those people entering the country. that will happen with refugees. >> thank you. [inaudible conversations]