tv Federal Officials Testify on Human Rights Violations in Russia CSPAN June 7, 2016 11:10pm-1:21am EDT
worked to pass another law last year that allows us to cease based on packaging, quantity and price so it goes around the scheduling but allows us to f d find -- fine the business up to 10,000 for selling it. i can give a 96-hour emergency closure. that is a little more than ceasing your product. now it is more cost of doing business and you can get a $10,000 fine. we take that product and get it tested to see if we can go forward with prosecution. this is an epidemic. it is not going to go away. it is continuing to change. most recently it targets the poor, homeless and those living
on the street and most vulnerable. we now have gotten the pre-trial service agency to do the screening for those out under supervision and it has made a big difference. we have a lot of challenges and a way to go. this is a dangerous drug and the stories you hear about the impact is it having on people i see first-hand every day so anything that can be done would be helpful. >> thank you. mr.
>> ocean county is the second largest county landwise in new jersey and our population is slightly over 600,000 people. fifth largest in new jersey. i am the chief law enforcement for the county. i watch over 200 employees, 95 detectives and agents and my support staff. i am here to discuss the emerging problem of synthetic drugs. this affects people across the country. traditionally it was k2, spice, and bath salts and those are a problem but we have synthetic marijuana, opioids and other new emerging variations. this is where i think the biggest emerging problem exists. inthet synthetic opioids and marijuana
being the biggest problem. one girl, 18 years of age, died in a motel room. they were doing 60 heroin packs a day. as a father of two children, i know it is my responsibility to use every effort to address the epidemic. in new jersey, we have the highest potency of heroin in the country and the least expensive. the synthetic opioid is so powerful a micro gram can kill. it is lethal and devastating. in 2012, there were 53 overdose deaths in ocean county. in 2013, 102 overdose deaths. as a result, the alarming numbers developed a plan to combat the epidemic. my plan is broken down into three areas. prevention, education, strict law enforcement and treatment and breaking the cycle of addiction. all of all initiatives
imelemented narcan is a huge part of that. i established a protocol and ocean county was the first state in new jersey to imelement a law enforcements narcan problem. i supplied kits and used dollars from drug dealers to fund the problem. we focused on the street and people were dosed with narcan. the first time used to save a life was april 6, 2014. drug-related deaths in new jersey were 129 saved and 104 related deaths. in 2015, 272 narcan employments
and # 100 deaths. and this year, 173 narcan deployments and 61 drug-related death. you can see the use of narcan were up but the overdose total rose to 118. the statistics for 2016 are not promising. we are anticipating the range of over a 150. we need to do more to develop a strategy to attack the cycle of opioid addiction. hospital, treatment options and detox are three steps. at the hospital, emt and paramedics transport a patient to additional treatment and hospital medication. after treatment, but prior to release, a recovery coach meets with the patient, and the recovery coach operates 24 hours a day, seven days a week, it is
a pilot program we instituted. there after, they are transported to a detox facility. at the detox facility the patient stays 48-72 hours and discuss treatment options and agreed to. the treatment options available are im-patient treatment and sometimes outside. working with the new jersey state police and the police lab announced that more often than not the taxes consumeed by ocean county taxes don't contain heroin but other drugs. these pacterize a cocktail containing drugs such as cocaine, heroin, fentanyl, methamphetamine, and the deadly is now synthetic opioids. fentanyl is a hundred times more powerful than mor phene. a 14-year-old died using fentanyl patches already.
there is a fentanyl that is more powerful and there is the tablet form and another form of fentanyl out there. now there is w-18 which is another synthetic opioid allegedly ten times stronger than morphine. it hasn't made its way to the jersey shore but has been seen in philadelphia. here is the issue. law enforcement has the problem with synthetic marijuana when synthetic marijuana constantly changes a small component of the product and lab testing can't identify the drug. designers change one small component to allude the testing from the schedule of the narcotic. it is reduced in a pill like form and because of the changing nature of the drug the national district attorney associations
signed for senator fienstein's bill and the district supports the assault pack mentioned her today. another concern is will narcan reject opioid. i will see if we need to adapt and reflect the changes to reflect synthetics as they develop. overdose deaths relate to new cocktails and the individual and body cannot handle the additives that the synthetic opioids contain. i would look to congress to take the lead and assist law enforcement and help the community address the issue. it is my police chief this epidemic -- belief -- this is an addiction issue that needs to be addressed with law enforcement and the community. >> thank you very much. now dr. smith. >> thank you very much, sir. it is an honor to be here.
you know, i was asked to speak in terms of medical aspects of these dangerous drugs; these synthetic drugs. i would like to lump them into a couple groups. first are the canabinoids. you have heard about them and in other testimony and they bind to the same receptors that marijuana does. the thc receptors in your brain. >> the capinoids are the second and they rebound to serotonin and dope mean and they are responsible for pleasurable feelings that your brain experiences and that you experience. they are different receptors but they affect people now in much the same way. i have a hard time telling them apart as an emergency physician. phenomenal blood pressure, immediately dangerous, critical levels. heart rates, same way.
very critical heart rates. blood pressure is 250 over 140 heart rates in the 170s, body temperature is 106, seizers, kidney failure, paranoia, and violence. violence beyond anything you have every seen. it is all common with these drugs. the other group, the synthetic opioi opioids. opiates, and let me touch on this, you have heard how potent they are but let me put it in perspective. if you think about most medicine
we news it is milligram quantities. something akin to a grain of salt. these things tr dosed in microgram which is a thousandth of a milligram. doses that are tiny fraction of a grain of salt being lethal. imagine how small it has to be to cause a fatal result. there are a lot of problems and there are no test. a lot came from the discussion into this. there are no test medically either. it is much bigger than we know of a problem and it is growing by leaps and bounds. they are associating these things in middle tennessee a 228 bed keep care hospital.
over the last three years, 198 of these patients have been admitted to the intensive care use. and we look at the hospital bill. sometimes they stay in the hospitals for two weeks and tie up beds that are neededed for patients are acute medical problems. it averaged about $29,000 a patient. that is pure cost. not charges. but cost to our system. if you do the math, and i believe i got this right, i did it twice, that is over $5.7 million in care to my hospital alone of those 198 people only three any insurance whatsoever. this is a true cost to our medical system. we don't know long-term effects. we don't. we know short term effects. we have seen behavioral disorders, people can kidney failure and way too many deaths.
in a survey, over 1500 emergency physicians across the united states in every state in the union responded and there was very interesting results there. the first was, 95% of the physicians saw an increase in the number of these drugs and their presentations in the emergency department. most importantly, 87% of the staff saw violent acts committed by these patients and 42% of the staff had seen actual injuries to staff members in the emergency department as a result of the violence to these patients. i will tell you a couple stories i have personally seen and dealt with to maybe put a human perspective on it although i don't think i can touch anything mr. rozga said. we had a 14-year-old child coming in the hospital wayieigw
140 pounds. we had consumed a canabanoid. he was restless and we gave him 140 mill grams of ver sed, a cousin of valium. ver sed, a typical dose for a young man like that to not be aware of a painful procedure is somewhere between one and three milligrams. this young man in the first hour he was in hour department was given 140 milligrams of this drug. that is, depending on the dosage range, 44-88 times the typical dose to control his behavior. any other child would have required life support, ventilator, blood pressure support to stay alive after that much medicine. that only kept him on the bed. he kept talking to me. in the next hour we was
transferred to a pediatric care nurse he consumed another hundred milligrams of the drug. there was a call to a hotel room where a man had consumed drugs and thought he was being attacked. he didn't own a firearm thank god but he pulled out his pepper spray and sprayed those he thought were attacking him. his girlfriend seeing the pa paranoia and violence called the police. as my first police officer went through the door he was retrieving his ax. he was about to spray those attackers. this is dangerous stuff. my solution, patients using
this. giving the power under the constitution is imperative. i appreciate the chance to talk to you and i am honored i am in your service. thank you. >> thank you, dr. smith. now dr. hall. >> chairman grassley, and ranking member klobuchar, what are known internationally as involve psycho active substances have become a major drug problem in the 21st century. along with the non-medical misuse of pharmaceuticals and of course heroin. you have heard the nature and extent of the problems caused by these toxic and addictive substances. i will use my time on the impacts of the state of florida
and address the vital role of epidemology in the early identification and spread of these substances in the united states and around the globe. in the autumn of 2014, fort lauderdale area of florida was hit with an epidemic of medical emergencies and deaths from the synthetic pvb sold on the street as flaca. it resulted in 63 deaths in brower county alone and produced thousands of medical emergencies. purchased online by mid level dealers from chemical suppliesu in china and shipped by world wp wide delivery services. a single kilo gram produced 10,000 doses. the frenzy of flaca united the community under the drug prevention and coalition of the united way.
the rapid and extensive response brought world wide media attention and pressure on the government of china to ban the prohibition -- or the production and sales of alpha pvp along with 1500 synthetic drugs effective october 1, 2015. within two months, flaca was done from the streets of fort lauderdale. demonstrating how a community working together across multiple organizations can attack a global problem. over the past two years, non-pharmaceutical fentanyl produced in labs in china and probably mexico have been linked to the majority of more than 1300-fentanyl related deaths just in florida. the non-medical pharmaceutical fentanyl has been sold as street
heroin, and more recently been described as xanax and other pills. they have been identified tragically after people have died. a vital surveillance system for involve psychoactive substanceicize the two-year old national instustute national drug early warning system or ndews. it's website provides special reports on synthetic drugs, webinars from leading scientist, a list of linking 1200 scientists and criminal justice professionals from 12 nations in real-time. other key surveillance is conducted by the ondcp network of investigative support centers as well as the european
monitoring center for drugs and drug addiction which is currently tracking more than 560 novel psychoactive substances including 98 new synthetics identifiied for the first time n 2015. and the radar, which studies prescription drug abuse, identified non-pharmaceutical fentanyl in 12 u.s. states and across canada. states have enacted legislation to address emerging synthetic drugs but the current analog catalog needs updated to change the constantly changing substances and facilitate the criminal activity associated with them. cutting the supply of toxic synthetic will call for china to
ban the online sales and deportation. the most important thing is to reduce the demand for drugs and one is prevention, particularly at the community level, and two a massive expansion of addiction treatment nationally. thank you very much. >> thank you. now i have questions. before i ask my questions, i am going to ask my questions and then i have to leave for an appointment and i thank senator klobuchar for continuing the meeting. mr. rozga, you and your family have become tireless advocates for education awareness. i told earlier how you were honored as an advocate for action by the office of national drug control policy in 2013. so, maybe too easy of a question
but one we have too your feeling on. can you tell us more about what you and your family have been doing in this area and how you have been working with families of other victims. do you think there are additional steps the federal government needs to take to educate young people about the dangers of synthetic drugs? >> our family specifically has worked with different communities, the governor's office of drug control policy through the state of iowa, and been invited into schools, communities, community groups, churches and so and so forth just to speak to the people there or students of these synthetic drugs. what is really so sad is amongst the parents, a lot of kids and grand kids, are sometimes all too well aware of these substances but it has not
registered on the adult's radar. or something, well it is illegal so that means it has gone away. we really need to have, in my opinion, in addition to better tools for law enforcement and prosecutors, there needs to be education that gets out on the grassl grassroots of the community. we keep in contact with families that have experienced loss and bad situations. what we do isn't meant for everybody. it is not easy to go and share and talk and as my wife would tell you when i do these things i put on my game face. but, we feel necessary part, we feel called to do this, and some of it is our son's legacy as well. we don't want to see his death
be in vain and our hope is prayer is others don't have to suffer what we have but sadly that has not been incase. >> chief lanier, i have heard statistics compared to synthetics crack cotain -- cocaine. a number of violent crimes appear to be connected to these drugs including the murder of a young man on the metro. could you describe the cases of synthetic drugs in the district? i know you cannot talk about ongoing prosecution so your ability to comment may be limited. but could you confirm that
synthetic drugs played a role in the young congressional staffer's murder last year? and finally, how have the drugs on the street affected your overall policing strategy, officer? >> there have been many violent crime cases and some homicides, whether the suspect was under the influence of the k2 or a known user of the synthetics, sometimes self-admitted, sometimes told in possession and sometimes told my family members. yes, the case you were referring to is one of those cases. we had an innocent victim in a recent case was viciously murdered. i happened to arrive minutes after the suspect was taken into custody. as soon as i looked at the suspect and the way he was behaving when the officer was trying to maintain him in custody, i knew immediately he was under the influence.
that is how dramatic the behavior is. i would liken it more to pcp than crack cocaine. in the early '90s, we had an issue with pcp, the similarities and violence compared to pcp is striking and i would venture to say more dangerous. the impact on the policing strategy? it is so difficult to go after something that initially started targeting children, then the general public, then targeted the people that were the most vulnerable, homeless and poor, and now to even with legislation and regulations in place for it to continue to change the strategy has to change daily. i have narcotics officers that are very, very good and very effective.
we have ceased last summer 232 pounds of the stuff. it barely made a dent. it is being prescribed as a street level drug. now it is becoming a street level drug, very cheap, very easy to purchase, and the consequences are just significant in terms of violence associated with it. >> thank you all for your testimony. now i am turn the meeting over to senator klobuchar. >> thank you very much, chairman. and thank you to all of you for your good work. i thought i would start with you, mr. coronato, you probably saw the prince's autopsy is out and today is prince day in minnesota. it was his birthday. so loved in our state and a
musical genius. this has hit everyone hard but we have seen synthetic drugs and opioid addiction hit many people that are not as famous in our state. i wonder if you could comment on fentanyl and what you are seeing in term of the increases and how that is playing out in the overall synthetic drugs abuse issue. >> when everyone said you dodged heroin i don't think that is the case. i think you are finding the fentanyl is a cocktail that is being included in the packet. i think the bodies can't handle it. i think what happens is it becomes a marketing tool but clearly you could see because it is so inexpensive and prevalent right now that more and more people when they become addicted to an opiate are going toward heroin. they don't know what they are getting.
they are getting fentanyl and heroin. it is a death consequence. >> you are talking about two ways. one it is prescribed or getting it illegally? >> the fentanyl is restrictive and usually for cancer patients. i don't think you see as much abuse there as much as the synthetically produced. when we hit a heroin lab that was in our county, they didn't understand how to even put the packets together. they had googled it. they were throwing the packets in, not weighing it. we got called in because we had four deaths in the immediate area and started drilling down and were able to determine this is where they were putting it together. the bottom line is that they make money on it. they are predators. you need to go after the predators. it is clear this is a death
sentence people have. they just don't understand it. >> i am a former prosecutor with a similar job for eight years in hennepin county. i tried to focus when i was asking the director about a bill i have with senator grassley and senator lindsay grahm and senator fienstein is on it, to close the loopholes that make it harder to bring the synthetic drugs uses and that is when they slap on the not intended for human consumption. our bill outlines factors you could use to get around that erroneous claims to show that in fact that is not how they were really marketing it. >> national district attorneys association really supports it. >> supports by bill? as oppose today the loopholes? >> yes. the key is we need that tool because we cannot bring justice.
we are into accountability and we cannot get accountability without that bill. >> thank you. where was having a memory of doing this fargo and moorehead communi community and there were people in the front row and i made a judgment call they were the head shop calls and they were mad we were trying to do things on this and i turned out to be totally wrong. they had a loved one that died from one of these synthetic drugs and they freely said this person had been taking drugs that were prescribed and then started doing the recreational drugs that were real and started taking the synthetic drugs and it was nothing like the real thing. they deliberately did it intensely so people got more addicted and then they are
beholden to them to buy stuff or they just didn't know what they are doing. >> i live it every day. we had a death on sunday. a death yesterday. while i was here i was making arrangements for the mom to see the body before the autopsy. my phone rings with regard to this. we are desperate for help. >> very good. thank you. i think there is all different things we should be doing with the prescription drug monitoring for the gateway. i think we need to do much more. you go into the going after the illegal drugs and law enforcement getting stuff out of people's medicine cabinets. getting money for treatment which has been a problem as well. i don't know if you want to comment on the fentanyl, chief ly linier. >> i would add the synthetics and k2, synthetic marijuana, it
isn't like marijuana at all. i think that you have people who hear that label and think that it is going to be like marijuana. this is a significantly different drug. we see those significant impacts on people who sometimes don't have any idea what it is they are taking >> you got it. that was the case in the moorehead area. they thought they were taking that and they were not. they were taking a much stronger, stronger dose. anyone else want to add anything more? >> dr. hall? >> yes. just quickly, the most recent development in the field has been the counter proscription drugs primarily containing non-pharmaceutical fentanyl. i was quoted with regard to the death of prince saying the real question is what kind of fentanyl was it? was it a counter fit pill?
this is what is rapidly spreading and we have seen it in 12 states in the united states and moved in from canada over the past two years. counter feit medications are the latest version of tragedies of synthetic drugs. >> and again, we don't know what happened and the investigations continue and i want to make it clear more than anything, while he was an incredible musician and celebrity, people have to understand this is happening to many different people every day as mr. coronato figured out. if you are paying taxes, they think it has to be safe. the government is collecting money and you don't know what you are getting.
there are all sorts of things that vary day to day and none of it is pharmaceutical. the package you buy next week may not have the same product. the fentanyl and opioids -- senator, have you taken a glass of water and poured a sports drink powder into it? you can taste that? that is a dangerous dose of fentanyl. just that small amount. these labs that the officers are encountering, these places are others go, maybe children are exposed to these products. they are changing. the chemist are changing these opioid molecules in ways that we are seeing with other things.
is our narcan going to work? >> because it will change and you don't know. first, i have to go to the gateway and we are seeing more people addicted. maybe once easier to get internet and doesn't seem see illegal as finding things on the corner. but more and more people are getting in different situations and branching out to find it other ways. we have gotten the stats for many years that 4-5 heroin users got their start with illegal prescription drugs. something i never saw as a prosecutor a decade ago. that is why i continue to focus and giving you more tools and resources to go after this and stopping this gateway. that means everything from better prescription drug monitori monitoring, you have states
where you just have to register and that sounds good but no one is entering the data. we have doctors and others that don't know if they have a doctor shopper in front of them or not. i know it is going to be rough because when we start clamping down and eliminating the number of pills by making it clear to patients that innocently come into an emergency room or get a tooth out it is like you are taking heroin. you need it for the pain and unless you are end of life, as said, this isn't a long-term pain solution. i think, with training of the doctors, and putting limits on the number of pills which we will probably have to do, unless the medical profession itself does it, and doing more on monitoring we will start seeing less of this, and then we will have this transition where ad p
addicts are going more and more to heroin and synthetic drugs. that is going to happen because we have to start limiting the gateway which is, not always at all, but in the majority of cases now is the opiates. so i think we are doing such a disservice when we don't go with the gateway in addiction to giving you -- addition -- the tools you need. if we just do that, and don't do treatment, and don't see why they are getting hooked, we will see more girls like casey, the champion swimmer from rural minnesota, and she is a swimmer, has pain, crones disease, and takes opiates, local doctor thinks it is okay and within a year or two she is dead because she got involved in a bad crowd because she started taking and getting heroin and doing everything else because she got addicted. i am just shocked at what we are seeing out there.
we have more people dying from that in minnesota than violent crime. we have rural emergency rooms overloaded. i have never seen anything more than the case where we own this. so i want to thank you all for being here today and your good work and assure you a lot oufs of us have your back. we want to make sure the treatment goes not just to those with kids but those and use this as a way to starting at everything differently when it comes to drug addiction. i don't want to start wit with
april union with prime minister david cameron. then a meeting on russia and human rights violations and later we look at synthetic drugs and the legal loopholes that allow them to be bought and sold. two congressional hearings tomorrow teal you about. at 9 a.m., a look at terrorism in south america and how it is funded through the drug chain. at 2:30 eastern, a senate hearing on the fast act. a five year transportation and highway bill. the transportation secretary anthony fox testifies about u.s. transportation needs before the senate commerce committee. watch live on c-span3 and cspan.org. >> c-span2's washington journal live every day. coming up wednesday morning, new
jersey republican congressman scott garret joins us to discuss an effort by the house financial service committee to change elements of the 2010 dodd-frank act that placed additional regulation on the wall street institutions. and then ohio democratic representative will be on to talk about u.s. trade policy including the debate over the transpacific partnership and other trade agreements. congresswoman will also discuss the ongoing impacts of nafta. in our spotlight on magazine segment, we will highlight the boston globe with a staff writer and his story about student loan debt tripling to 1.3 trillion dollars. join the discussion and watch us live wednesday morning. british prime minister david cameron and the leader of the uk independence party debated british member in the european
union in the live debate. prime minister cameron has been a vocal advocate of staying in the eu. it was hosted by british broadcaster ite. >> europe the heart of the debate that will change the destiny of britain. stay or go? tonight as the arguments intensify, two men with different visions of the future of the european union are live before a studio audience. the battlelines are drawn on the biggest political discussion of a lifetime. [applause]
>> good evening, there are 16 days to go before the u.k. makes a big decision of staying in or leaving the european union. david cameron called this referendum and wants us to remain. nigel farage has spent his political lif to get out. over the next hour, beoth men will be quizzed by the audience. first up is nigel farage. [applause] >> welcome. >> thank you. >> our first question is from dani daniel: >> the majority of the u.k.'s economist and business leaders believe that leaving the eu has the potential of decline and recession. i don't see what we seek to gain
from the change. >> 25 years ago he had a government backed up by the puc, backed up by lof the so-called expert economist, and mr. cameron at the time worked in the treasury, and they took us into something called the exchange rate mechanisms and pegged the level of sterling against the -- i thought the whole thing was stoned bunkers. within two years, all experts showed record repossessions. then the euro came along ten years later and 15 years ago the very same people were all saying to us, if you don't join the euro then i am afraid foreign direct investment into britain will cease, the city of london will close, and all i can say now is thank god we didn't join the euro. and this same gang, who seem to
be wrong about everything, through the process of group think, and because in many cases although they masquerade as being independent, they are actually being paid by the government or paid by the taxpayer telling us terrible things will happen to us outside of the european union. they were wrong before and they are wrong again. there are strong independent voices in business that are resigning positions to speak out. and the former director general of the cbi is one of them. the trend is they support the status quo, once they retire, or resign, the former governor of the bank of england, then they speak more freely. trade is not made by governments. trade is not made by bureaucrats. it is made by people like you. you chose to buy a product or your don't.
once we divorce ourselves from political union we will then go on buying cars, wine and trading happy. >> we will stay with questions on the economy and go to a gentlemen not far away. aaron has a question for mr. farage. >> hello. i work in the pharmacy industry. ... u.k. >> i have to say that i'm not
entirely happy with much of the way the pharmaceutical industry has behaved. in particular i see their lobbying in brussels it is absolutely massive. i see the way, they been very good at putting out of business. people producing medicine. i've heard these arguments about car manufacturers. people are only here because in this country we have a big domestic market. only 12% of the is export to the european union. >> 2.4 billion, now, this agency is in london.
the whole of all of them are reviewed in europe. you can't do that. >> i'm sorry. i'm sorry. [applause] this was entirely and utterly false. >> for example our biggest industry isn't pharmaceutical. our biggest industry by a mile is financial services of all kinds from stocks and shares to pensions and head hedge funds, you name name it. all of that is being transferred to agencies. >> okay were going to stay with these issues and go to heather reed. we have another question. >> if we find ourselves punished or financially crippled to set examples, what's in place to protect us especially when
negotiations don't go our way? >> okay fine, what do we join 40 years ago. tariff free access. the tariffs across the world have come down because of globalization. for the benefit of tariff free access to the market that sells to us more than we sell them, that regulates and the other 88% as well gives it unlimited movement of people and bounds us making our own trade deals with the rest of the world and the cost of membership now far outweighs any benefit. if those negotiations went badly, let's say the worst-case scenario that the french and germans decide,. >> hang on, let's just say they decide to cut off their nose to spite their face of their biggest export market in the world.
if they put tariffs on us, those tariffs will be significantly lower than our net financial contribution. so no deal is better than a rotten deal that we have at the moment. >> and the reality,. >> i might come back on that. >> the president of the eu commission has already said that it would not be welcomed. >> isn't that lovely. >> and that the u.k. has to accept being regarded as a country and not be handled with kid's glove glove. the prime ministers of spain. >> i'm sorry, were british, were better than betty than that and we won't be bullied by anybody. forget it. >> you've maintained that wages have been cap controlled by the immigration in the u.k. and if
we leave the eu wages will rise. wouldn't it be increased wages will make us less competitive globally and isn't it far better that we allow wages to rise because we have a stronger economy rather than artificially restrict the supply of labor. >> what we've done and given our labor market where there's been a dramatic oversupply. that is driven down the cost of labor. even the bank of england who backs up the fact that the people on average salaries, their living standards are 10% lower than they were in 2008. if i can come back to i'm not. >> what i'd say to you on that is just artificially judging this environment in the u.k. by restricting labor supply, you said the problem you've got as
you've seen traditional industries moved to other parts of the world to lower cost of manufacturing. simply, if you make it more expensive to do business artificially, it's going to migrate. >> this may well be because when he was here before the committee, he was asked if there is a work permit system and wouldn't wages go up. he said yes. i don't think that would be a good thing. there was more to this country, there's more about our community than just being competitive. >> were artificially putting ourselves into an environment. >> i'm sorry sir, what's artificial. to flood our labor market and to see. >> if you double the cost of
that kind of work, what are you going to do christmas. >> i don't know. >> we won't double the cost. it will be significantly high but i think it is wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong that the average decent families in this country living standards have fallen by 10% over the past few years. it's time as a society we started thinking not just about gdp figures, not just about the rich getting richer but about our we decent britons. [applause] we are going to now stay with integration. here's another question. >> what i would like to know is how can we use such blatant tactics in the campaign in light of the recent horrific sexual assault in germany and you basically suggested that a vote to remain is a vote for women to be reduced to the same.
>> calm down there just a little bit. sometimes in life what is set at the top of the newspaper page and what you actually said can be different things. i'm used to being demonized because i've taken on. >> and i have, just let me finish, and i have a when i first suggested we should have an australian starpointe system you thought it was dreadful. now i'm pleased to say lots of people are saying it. >> what i said was that it's a huge issue in germany and in sweden. i think angela merkel has made a huge mistake by saying please, anyone calm. what's happened is a very large number of young single males have settled in germany and in sweden who come from cultures where attitudes towards women are different. >> are you not embarrassed that this is promoting racism. >> i'm sorry but i'm not going
to attack the archbishop of canterbury but i think he would've done better to read what i said and not with the headline what's. >> he would do well to see what's the head of the roman catholic church in germany has said. >> they play a pawn rational feelers about migration. >> this is an issue for the future. it is a piddly little issue, as far as i'm concerned, in this election campaign. i knew at some point in this campaign they would come to me and try to inflate something i said. i do believe in both controls. i believe we need to have a sensible balance migration policy and i believe germany made a bad mistake. >> where you go to edward. >> i know a lot of people and i
have access to a predominantly black english audience. a lot of issues they have raised is that you are going to increase the fear and discrimination of black british people through your anti- immigration rhetoric. >> are you encouraging racism question it. >> you couldn't be more wrong and here's why. >> how are you going to safeguard that. >> here's why. >> i take a very strongly pro-commonwealth view. i think it's very bad and wrong of us to turn our backs on the commonwealth in favor of a european particle projects. we made a bad mistake. now now what do we do. >> if you're got qualification and you come from india or come from parts of africa, you now find it very, very difficult to get into this country despite the historical strong. >> you are anti-immigration. >> i tell you what, your campaign has gone against people
that look nonwhite. how are nonwhite british people going to think about their nationality in this country that is what i really want to know? >> i'm sorry, i'm sorry. while i tell you what, if you want to think that. >> i don't think that, that's what the majority of people have concerns about and you're dismissing them. >> lots of them voted for my party in the last election. >> did they. >> you not listening are you. >> i'm explaining to you the pro- commonwealth position. if we have a point system rather than an open door to 508 million people then actually, it will be better for black people coming into britain who currently find it very difficult because we
have this open door. i was also say this to you. once again this attempt to demonize the lead campaign or me actually, there is big support for this and actually our open border policy is damaging all of our communities. here's our job. maybe our only chance is a nation to get a grip on this issue. [applause] we are now going to go to john nightingale. >> a number of high-profile studies have clearly shown that eu migrants contribute far more to the british economy than they take out. how can you constantly ignore these findings and continue to tell us that immigration is a disaster for the u.k.? >> we see reports that say that the migrants pay more tax than they take out. i saw a report yesterday that
suggested that actually it's a marginal loss for the country. i'll tell you what will do. i'll meet you in the middle. the house of lords looked at this and said in economic terms is probably about equal. but mr. cameron will come on "after words" and tell you that it's a wonderful economic benefit. despite his pledge in a general election of reducing immigration to tens of thousands year, he now says it's disastrous for our economy. the real truth is the populaon of this country is rising at a number where we need to value people's quality of life and standard of living and not just national gdp figures. if in the immigration continues at the current rate, our population will be 80 million by 2040. you would need to build a new house every four minutes just to cope with current number.
>> what i'm saying to you is. >> let me tell you that we, as you well know have an aging population here. we are going to need migrants to pair pensions and to pay for happy hospitals and all of that is going to be necessary. if you think you can actually stop people coming in here, if you persuade our country to lead the european union and then you find in fact every country, every european country that wants to trade in the free market has to have a free movement of the people, what are are you going to do? >> then he going to asked to join again? >> nowhere else in the world, apart from the eu is the argument made that to trade with each other you need to have free will of the people. that doesn't exist anywhere else. >> but it does in the eu. >> the americas some more into the european union market than we do. they are not members of the european union and they do not have a trade deal and they most certainly don't have free movement.
>> every european country that wants to trade with the eu has to have free movement. >> actually the swiss are against it. >> thank you very much indeed. >> we will cover more topics. you have a? law and order and security. >> according to the director of europe, enforcement in the u.k. comes from our membership. given that a number of police chiefs has said it will have a negative impact. how are you going to assure our safety isn't compromised if we leave? >> again it's the same debate. some people say that it's much better to be with the european union and they tend to be the people who are comfortably employed. >> then you get someone who says actually it's a very dangerous place for us to be. look, i take this very simple view.
the migrant policy, and these are not refugees has led to up to 5000 jihadists coming into the european union in the space of the last 15 months. they said we might as well put a sign on the seven beaches of europe sang terrorists welcome. we have a very real problem. now the question is, how do we deal with issues like this. the first point which is really, really important is this. this should be a british passport but it says european union on it. i think to make this country safer we need to get back to british passport so we can check anybody else coming in this country. i really do.
>> i agree on your border control point but what i'm talking about our security is not just about that. you have to set terrorism side. you've got stuff like convention which now has databases set up to be changed. if we leave all of them will be taken out under the european union. yet the arrangement where their much lower under that and there's all these reasons that aren't actually terrorist or immigrant related. when you're talking to. security, were leading people in europe to a huge number changes. >> one is that as a sovereign nation we cooperate and change exchange information just as we do with the americans but no one says we have to come to america to do this but i suggest we do this is a sovereign nation and
not give away the authority. >> he's equally criticized. already got a lot of intelligence coming. >> the ones within the european union, i don't think. [inaudible] now were going to hear from john who has a western about sovereignty. >> the un and the ins, all of which involves sovereignty trading to some extent. is it. >> you mention the wto. when international trade is being discussed, sometimes were not even in the room because we've given away the ability to do that to an unelected
bureaucrat based in brussels. >> they are elected and appointed and have the sole right to oppose legislation. >> we live in an interdependent world but the point about this referendum, for us to vote to get our independence as a nation and that means we make our own flaws in our own and we can then make her own decision. >> one more question. excuse me for interrupting their >> we've been told that this referendum is a once in a generation opportunity. i'm interested to know what you think the eu will look like in
20 years time if we stay in it? >> i think it's done for frankly. i think the eurozone is a catastrophe. just look at what they've done to greece and other mediterranean countries. the migrant carries this is now not just dividing countries but dividing within countries and leading to a whole new brand of politics. the money has run out. and yet, at the same time they're saving up for the day after our referendum about an increase european budget. the project doesn't work. i want us to get back our independence and to say will be good europeans that will trade with europe and cooperate with europe but govern ourselves. i believe we do that the rest of europe will do that too. a happy europe europe will be a democratic europe. that's where i want to get us to >> thank you so far to our questions and we will let you
take your lead from us. were going to short bake right now and then they will be her to take more questions from our audience. please stay with us. hello and welcome back. in the first have our var program we had an independence program of why he believes we should lead the eu. now david cameron who wants us to say stay, it's it's his turn to face our studio audience six
months ago you told them, why are you so adamant if we decide to leave? >> we can certainly survive outside the eu. i think the question for us is how do we thrive? how do we create opportunities and jobs for our children and grandchildren. that to me is what this debate is about. i think what's so unique about it is the extraordinary consensus. the governor of the bank of england and the international monetary fund all say they believe we would suffer a hit to our economy, hit two jobs and what that means to people's living standards and higher prices in our shops. potentially a recession. i think it would be irresponsible for me not to warn of these things. after all, some of these bodies
are paid to warn prime ministers when their economies face risk. yes we could find a way but in my view it's not the right way. i wonder if i can just take a moment to say why will these experts i believe are right. it's to do with this single market. 500 million people. it's why we sell half of the goods and services that we export. of course if we have less good access to that market our economy will be smaller and no be fewer opportunities. that's why think the experts are right. i think we should listen to their opinion and vote to remain on the 23rd it produces only 16000 people to come over from europe and 1.6 million had already arrived.
>> there was such a consensus with all these economists and as i said what that saying makes sense to me because if you're a great training nation and we are a great trading nation, if you cut yourself off from the most important market then you're going to be disadvantaged. others said they wouldn't reduce in britain. another 300,000 are helping to supply it. it's a wonderful success in our company. if we have the same situation as america which is what they're talking about, our cars would face a 10% tax. that's why i think you would see less investment and less jobs. i think there's a real concern from that and we would be worse off. >> we need to move on. we have a lot to get to. >> prime minister, you gave gave an excellent speech in 2013 outlining the minimum reforms that you wanted to get from the eu.
one of the key ones was if you're running a small business and if you wanted to remove the free movement of people so we could reap crude skilled people from all over the world, not just from the eu. you were basically humiliated on that so why on earth are you now saying that the eu is wonderful. you were saying you would leave if you didn't get those reform. >> what i said is that are needed to be less of a single currency cap. i got those. i said i wanted it to be less bureaucratic and cut regulation and i got that. i said that i wanted to make sure it was less of a political union for us. but we want to live in a country and be part of european union. so i got us access to that. crucially, on migration in the movement of the people, i said i didn't think it was right that
people come to our country and immediately take advantage of the benefit system. what i secured was this idea or proposal that people come here first of all they can't claim unemployment and if they don't have a job within six months they have to go home and if they do work here, and many people do work here and make a great contribution, if they do work your they don't get full access to our welfare system until they've worked here for four years. i think that is important it's no more something for nothing. yes coming contribute but you have to pay them before you get out. if you need skilled people from outside the eu, i've even had to spend thousands of pounds waiting for year to get a tear to visa for my staff to come here. it's ridiculous when someone can walk in here and do the most
junior unskilled job from the eu and we can't get the skilled people we need from anywhere where we need them. >> carmack honestly, the control of immigration, i'm sure we will talk about it it's an important challenge. one of the ways we tried to control it from the rest of the world is to say that we should do more to train our own people here to do the jobs that the british economy is delivering. so what we have is, if there's a shortage shortage of a particular application, we say you can go from overseas, but what i want to see as more friendships and more people going to university and more young people trained to do the jobs and that is probably the best way of reducing immigration. >> thank you. we have a question from for you. >> i have note duty in my area. a place where i grew up is now a
no go zone. how is the eu and uncontrolled immigration working for me, i've been working full-time since the age of 16. >> i would say there's good ways of controlling immigration and bad ways of controlling immigration. the good way is what i just explained that people can come here and working contribute but they have to pay them before they get out. when it comes to immigration outside the eu which is more than half, we do put a number that come forth on economic numbers. i would say frankly if we want to build houses we must him best in our health service and we want good schools for children we have to strengthen and safeguard our economy. were pulling out of the single market which is what the campaign wants to do. that would damage our economy. they kept talking about gdp isn't all that matters.
gdp is the size of our economy. it's a combination of all the wealth that our country creates. he's basically saying it doesn't really matter. he's so keen to get us out of europe that he is prepared to sacrifice jobs and growth all the way. we mustn't do that. >> i voted for you in the last election because one of the things was to get immigration down. you haven't been able to do that because you're not allowed to do that. that's the bottom line. i can see my standard of living going down because of this influx that we can't control. i'm sorry to say that your closing statement last week was that if we leave the eu we are rolling the dice with our children's future. i think quite the opposite. while you tend to stay here you've rolled that dice are ready. [applause]
- honestly i don't agree with that. i think the biggest risk we can take this up a lot of the eu come up a lot of the single market, damage our businesses, damage jobs in the be fewer opportunities for children and grandchildren. i hope when people go to vote they think about their children and grandchildren. they think about the jobs and the opportunities they want for them, the sort of country we want to build together and they vote to say we don't want, we want to be great britain were great if we stay in these organizations. >> we have a question over here. >> mr. cameron, i don't have to say you tell you that we currently do not have enough resources. if we remain in the eu, what plans do you have. >> first of all i think if we stay in the eu and we keep our economy strong, that the absolute key to providing a strong nhs. that's why the head of the
systems that it's only with a strong economy that you can keep putting money and resources into the nhs. on the issue of migration, i absolutely agree it is a challenge and i don't think it's a challenge we should meet by damaging our economy. as we think about it, i think we think we should also think about the 50000 eu nationals that work in our nhs. very often you will find. >> with got enough skilled people. if that was your main concern, you wouldn't be taking away the funding. my issue is what category can i have in place so that people can get the access they need to. it's nice that they can bring over doctors and nurses, but what can you put in place to ensure we can deal with this. >> what were going to put in his extra 12 billion in this parliament in the nhs. into making sure that we meet waiting times not just for
cancer but for mental health. >> i just want to say me and my coworkers, were provided excellent care. you need to do your part. >> we have a question from stuart. >> you went to the eu to reform our membership and get a better deal. you share more frustration that eu citizens are still able to come into the u.k. and claim benefits. what assurances can you give us that if you stay you will look for further reform? >> i agree with you reform doesn't end on june 23. if you want to stay and we should keep performing this organization. i would say, anything it's very important, if you i think we have a special status in the eu. were not in the euro. we have our own currency. were not in the no border zone, we kept our own borders. our membership is right for britt written.
he gives us the trade in the corporation. it helps us work with other countries to get what we want. now in terms of reform, i think the things i secured do really help us. they safeguard our country. it means we can't be discriminated against. they make sure there are targets cutting regulations on business that people find frustrating. the reform goes on, but of course if we leave, reform ends. here's what really happens if we leave. >> we still have to me all the rules of the regulation that brussels lays down, but we will be at the table. will be like the country with our gear in our face pressed up against the door trying to find out what's happening with the other 27 countries making rules that affect our country. i would i would say that is no way for the fifth biggest economy in the world to behave. we need to be in this organization, fighting for british jobs. losing is quitting. i don't think were quitters. i think were fighters. we fight for these organizations
for what we think is right. >> it's your opportunity say we've got the referendum coming to get the bill that would be right for britain but you weren't able to achieve that. >> so you mention specifically the issue of benefits and one of my key demands, which i got is that if you come here you don't get unemployment benefits. if you don't have a job after six months you have to leave. it is a free movement, and work but is not a free free moment, and live off someone else's taxpayer. uniquely in britain you're going to have to work here for four years into the system, contribute to our economy before you get full access to our welfare system. i think that is a really good proposal and one that we only get if we stay. if we leave, reform is over and i worry that what would happen to our economy and the jobs of people that i think is the most important thing.
>> by how many figures to expect the migration from the east as a result of the form reform to be secured. >> i haven't made a forecast because we've had extraordinary years recently in the european union. for the first five years, our comic economy created more jobs than the rest of the eu put together. we have seen a lot of people coming to live and work here. actually nine out of ten people are british national. two thirds of the jobs created since i've been prime minister have been british people taking those jobs. i'm not to make a forecast but i think it stands to say that if today you can come in from the eu and get 10000 pounds of tax credit on top of your wages, i say you won't have that in the future clearly that will make a difference. >> thank you so much. we get the question now. mr. cameron, you recently celebrated the eighth hundred
anniversary of magna carta. we have the greatest legal system in the world. is it not shameful that since joining in the eu our parliament is no longer sovereign, our supreme court is no longer supreme in our nation is no longer self-governing. [applause] first well, i think were engaged in the greatest act of national sovereignty that we've had in many years where the people will decide whether we stand this organization or whether we leave. i would say if parliament is sovereign, we have proposals and measures and some that you might agree with or disagree with but there british proposal for the british people from the british government. you hear them talk about petri patriotism. i love this country with a
passion. you love your country and you don't damage its economy. you don't restrict opportunities for young people. you don't actually isolate your country and refuse its influence in the world. you don't strengthen your country. and deeply patriotic. i think this is the case for a bigger greater britain inside the european union. that may go directly to this point. >> please do. >> your common library is estimated that 65% aurora of our laws are made by britain parliament. >> true sovereignty is about control.
do you have control over your country's destiny? we are trading nation. we need access to the single lobby. if we leave leave it still exist. the eu still exists we have to obey every single one of the rules and regulations but we have no say over what they are. take the car industry. i want to make sure were around the table writing the rules for electric cars. i want us to be the leader. i want us to be the winners in europe and in the world when it comes to technologies like this. we reduce our influence if we walk away or quit. it might give you the illusion to withdrawal on june the 23rd but you'll find out an area after area after area, things that affect our great country we would have no say over. we want to make sure ron can't get a nuclear weapon and be strong in the ukraine, we have to work in these organizations. sometimes it can drive me mad. it is a bureaucracy it is
frustrating but i honestly believe walking away and quitting would reduce our national influence reduce our economy and reduce our stay in the world and as a result the image our country. [applause] >> thank you. we have a question now also. >> mr. cameron, i know that were all meant to elect a local, but every time a customer comes in my shop, not one of them. that is shameful on their part in it shameful that the eu isn't reaching out where it should be. we just don't know who they are.
invest many of them and not one of them know. what are your thoughts on that? >> on the european parliament or the european union to have more power, i want the the power to reside in our parliament. this is an important point of people are concerned about the future. if there is any proposal to pass further powers powers from our parliament to brussels, that has to be a referendum. there's a lawn whether more power can be passed. does brussels need reform benchmark yes. do these institutions need opening up? yes. can it be frustrating? of course it can. the question we ask is not due i like the european parliament. frankly i don't like it pretty much. but are we better off, are we stronger, are we safer if we stay in this organization than if we leave. that's the question. people will share many frustrations. the frustrations within institution is not a justification for walking away. it's an argument for staying and
fighting for what you need. >> question him on order. >> mr. cameron, just today we have seen more evidence at the type of crimes committed by eu nationals and they come here to create more crimes. if we can remain in the eu how can we protect the public from the eu nationals who have created offenses in the home country first while we will keep our border control so we can stop everyone at our border. eu nationals included in the four think there a for our country we don't let them in i strengthen that in our renegotiation to give us more freedom to do that. one of my greatest frustrations of prime minister is going to some of these countries like nigeria and jamaica or pakistan
and trying to get foreign nationals out of our prison and over to the countries where they came from in europe we do at least have a directive on prisoner transfers which is coming into force and will be able to get those people out of our prisons so they can be paid for by the country of citizens they are. otherwise it will be far more difficult to get these people out of our country. >> there are 59 individuals individuals released today in france. they want to get them out of the country because they created serious crimes but brussels said no. how can we deal with that issue? it's not fully enforce. >> when will that be. >> in the coming months. we've seen some go and we'll see a lot more go. if we leave will be back to the situation we have with other countries on the other side of
the world where it can take months and years and sometimes decades. inside europe people could flee britain and go to the crime in spain and it would take decades to get them back. just one more point. because of the arrest warrant we can now get people back to face justice in our courts. >> that's great. bring them back to their own countries but why are they entering the u.k. in the first place. >> they shouldn't. my renegotiation means we have more freedom to stop people from coming in and the first place. leave in those things go. >> thank you. will leave another question.
>> if you use this are you finished as prime minister. if you do lose what does britain look like in 20 years time? >> first of all, this is a vote of the british people. having promised this referendum i said i would accept your instructions. i think it's very important that people, individual careers in the future don't get caught up in the spoke. i want everyone to focus clearly on the choice. the choice you've heard tonight. do you go with nigel and the relief teams to put jobs at risk? where do you go with this extraordinary alliance
today's time i'll be hosting the referendum to have the 16 people. join us for reaction and analysis. think so much to everybody for all of your question. thanks to you for watching. good night. as part of india prime minister, he speaks to a joint section of congress tomorrow at 11 am eastern. watch live on our companion network cspan. we are going public. we will be watched by her friends and people across the country and i would hope as i've said before that the senate may change.
not as an institution but maybe become a more efficient body because of televised proceedings. the proceedings of the united states senate are being broadcast to the nation on television for the first time, not since we have operated in secret until now but millions of americans have sat in the galleries and observed senate debates during their visits to washington. today they can witness the proceedings in their own home. the senators have been acting on that stage, the audience is in the gallery and buy our action today we haven't really fundamentally are altered that situation. we've simply in large galleries. we have pushed up the wall to include all of the american people who wish to watch. >> commemorating 30 years of
coverage of the u.s. senate on c-span2. our c-span campaign 2016 bus continues to travel throughout the country to honor winners from this years student cam competition. recently we stopped in maryland washington d.c. also at silver spring maryland where students were presented awards and for the students, teachers, parents and elected officials for using 14 winning videos including a first prize student cam documentary entitled driving forward. they won $3000 for documentary on infrastructure spending. the bus also made a stop at woodrow wilson high school in washington d.c. where mark jackson and allie received honorable mention for their video and were awarded $250 each
a special thanks to our cable partner comcast cable for helping coordinate these visits in the community. you can view all the winning documentaries that student cam.org. >> a senate hearing looks that u.s. relations with russia and russia affects in europe. members heard testimony from officials in a russian pro-democracy advocate. this hearing of the senate foreign relations committee is just over two hours. the foreign relations committee will come to order. we think our witnesses for being here and look forward to their testimony. were obviously here today to talk about russia and its role in the world. together our countries have conquered the nazis, prevented the proliferation of nuclear weapons in the '90s and worked against terrorism in the years after 911. for most of modern history, americans and russians have found themselves at cross
purposes throughout the cold war. we train to obliterated each other. with the fall of the berlin wall many politicians argued that the difficult days of competition were behind us. leaders like gorbachev work to place russia on a path toward democracy and peaceful engagement with the rest of the world. reagan asked that the wall be torn down. george w. bush had him come to his home. scholars will argue over exactly when the u.s. russia relationship became controversial. since that summer, so called resurgent russia has pushed back on the institution and allies of the west.
russia has struck them in ways designed to prevent their integration and enter the. this strategic arms reduction treaty, the open skies treaty and the c agreement. they to increase democracy and beg questions about the future. not just in moscow but across the federation. now we talk about us, russian russian relationships, the way that we interact globally, today is following the end of the cold war and as a relationship, it has once the again grown stressful and occasionally confrontational. we must address these topics through the lens of realism.
it will be easy to catalog the events that have brought us to where we are today but we are charged with the higher responsibility which is to not only diagnose the problem but to begin generating for prescriptions of where we go next. discussions about the violation must be paired with ways of setting boundaries and engaging with russia. to make our world more stable, you must serve the national interest. it's too important to resign ourselves to the increasing risk of confrontation escalation. i look forward to the day tuesda ideas about enforcing the relationship and a new strategy that puts us on a better trajectory. >> first let me thank you for calling this hearing. let me concur that in all of
your comments in your opening statement, i totally agree with the points that you raised in the challenges we have in regard to our relationship with russia. today we meet to discuss russia's efforts. russia's actions in 2008 support for separation the invasion of ukraine, illegal that has challenge the security of sovereign borders, something that has been a mainstream of relations since 1975. there are also seminal arms control treaty. while i understand russia with some treaties, it is in violation of with others.
i'm concerned about these violations and look forward to learn how we can strengthen our viability and enforce their terms. it's listed in our international commitments. this should not lead us to the conclusion that all arms-control agreements should be ripped up. i also want to underscore the importance of these treaties to our allies. as we seek to bolster european unity what is also lost in the debate about russia's terrorist treats its own people at home.
a prominent member of the opposition who is present in moscow under suspicious circumstances. think you for your courage and all that you do for the people of the russian federation. new laws targeting foreign agents and organizations that label them as traitors of the russian state have been part of the work of several foundations. vladimir putin has fueled corruption by reit weakening the rule of law and his associates know they depend on access and allegiance to the regime. those who make public those corrupt acts are threatened, abused or even worse. he was one of them and played paid the ultimate price for his honesty. as everyone knows, 40 people have been sanctioned since 2012.
i called them the administration to respond to human right violation. he is intent on undermining democracy at home and abroad. we can never forget our principles and turn to blind eye to human right violation committed by the vladimir putin routine regime. i look forward to hearing from our witnesses. >> thank you very much. we appreciate them being here. i don't think we've had as many people from outside the building trying to get in front obviously something people care about. we think the honorable victoria newlin, secretary of state and immigration affairs for being here. we look forward to your testimony. doctor michael carpenter, doctor for russia, ukraine and eurasia.
we have read your written testimony in advance. >> thank you chairman, members of this committee for the opportunity to join you and discuss the challenges posed to international peace and security by russia today. as you almost, for more than 20 years, following the, following the collapse of the civil union, the united states have sought to build a constructive relationship with russia and the rule of international order. the assumption in doing this was a more integrated democratic secure prosperous russia would be a safer more predictable and willing partner for the united states and our allies. by 2014 however, we had no
choice but to reevaluate our assumptions following their invasion of you rainy and territory. they were not living by the rules of the institution. our approach to russia today seeks first to deter further aggression through the projection of strength and unity with our allies, second to build resilience and reduce reduce vulnerability among friends and allies that are facing pressure and coercion. third to cooperate on security priorities when our interests and russia's dual line and forth to sustain ties to the russian people and have a more constructive relationship in the future. let me go through these. first strengthen deterrence.
to counter the threat and deter moves against nato territory, over the past two years the u.s. and our allies have maintained persistent rotational military presence on land, sea and air along nato's eastern edge, the baltic states. as we look toward the nato summit in warsaw this coming july, there will be a morse sustained approach to deterrence to reduce response time to any aggression. to support this commitment the president has requested $3.4 billion to fund the initiative. with your support these funds will be used to deploy a rotational armored brigade team to central and eastern europe and for pre-positioning of equipment and trainers and exercises in europe. doctor carpenter will talk about this in detail. to press moscow to bring an end
to the violence in ukraine fully implement its commitment we have worked with the eu, the g-7 and other like-minded nations to impose successive rounds of sanctions on russia over the past two years. we are now working intensively with europe to ensure that you sanctions are rolled over at the end of this month and to support france and germany and their lead diplomatic role to push to the full implementation of the agreements including the withdrawal of all russian forces from ukraine and the return of ukraine sovereign border. even as we defend nato territory, we are are also working to reduce the vulnerabilities and with increase resilience of those countries across europe that face pressure from moscow. to help ukraine, united states is committed over $600 million in hundred million dollars in security assistance. we have trained 1700 ukrainian horses in regard personnel and a
>> >> to contain the nuclear threat and to negotiate the new s.t.a.r.t. treaty and as you although over the past eight months secretary kerry has leveled the efforts to resolve the crisis in syria to establish the international syria's support group banded agreement on hostilities that has reduced violence even if that is tested every
single day they have all required hard-headed diplomacy with russia we continue to call on the kremlin to burying on the regime of casualties to end the humanitarian aid delivery obstruction to these communities finally we must continue to engage directly with those russian individuals who want to work with us and to share our interests and values and are working for a better future for our -- for their country our exchange program and scientific cooperation remains hugely popular with the russian people will also continue to speak out against policies that impede the work of russian civil society in the fundamental rights of freedom of expression, assembly and elsewhere in the region. the approach without the
contradictions i will not claim to bring an end to russian aggression or unmitigated support for the saudi regime but i am convinced unity over the last few years has been essential to dieter the worst behavior to bring the kremlin to the issues from ukraine to read iran to syria. thank you for your attention >> chairman and ranking members of the committee i appreciate this opportunity to update you on the strong the balanced approach to deter russian aggression defending their homeland and strengthening the resilience of our allies and partners to russian coercion and intimidation. those interventions with
complete disregard for the alleged daschle commitments with the most basic principles of the international order including sovereignty and borders. to intervene militarily with the iranian revolutionary guard corps russia's nuclear saber rattling raises troubling questions about commitments to stability and begins the spread of nuclear weapons. with regards to arms control that has violated those agreements to the military modernization plans but others such as the new s.t.a.r.t. treaty that puts the strategic nuclear weapons a historical low
levels. brushes six to be a qualitative peer across latency and air and space edition touche cyberspace across the electromagnetic spectrum. our approach to counter russian aggression is coordinating efforts to strengthen our capabilities imposture investments and plans without foreclosing the possibility of working with russia when it is in our interest. the most critical elements is defense of the homeland which is reflected above 583 billion of this year's budget request to modernizing the forces the recapitalization program ballistic missile submarine and the cruise missile as well as life extension
programs. we're moving toward the development of new technology to be sure we have a qualitative edge over potential high and adversaries including new on the and systems new long-range weapons and innovative technologies lasers it new systems for electronic warfare in cyberspace. will also strengthen our alliances and partnerships said they congress for their continued support as has the invention since inception of the department of defense to strengthen our deterrence europe the fiscal year 2017 budget proposes quadrupling funding for more than 3.$4 billion to allow us to increase our posture by augmenting to combat teams
secretary of of carter has understood that approach was strong and balanced leave the door open-heart to return to compliance and engagement with the international community and in the meantime we will counter russian commercial with the posture that is defensive and proportionate in spite of actions we will continue to a finance our vision of a europe free and in peace. >> we have both as it 2:00 divemaster five minutes everybody tries to stay within that i will just ask one question that secretary, we met briefly prior to this hearing.
they're doing what they're doing since 2008 is the aggressive way to violate the sovereignty of other countries share thoughts as to what rushes game is. are they trying to take on more territory? what is the game plan? >> senator was simply say but don't think it is productive to speak for russia but i would highlight what the president himself has said and i point to his speech at the munich security conference where he very much regret it the loss of control over soviet space and the end of the soviet union so clearly that is something on his mind but i would defer that question to the russians.
>> it is an safe-haven to be in the political opposition and what are they doing in regards to those that oppose the putin regime? >> obviously we continue to speak out strongly whenever they constrain the space to restrict human rights we have worked with vladimir and others who were seeking a different future for russia. we have programs both inside and outside russia with the russian activists to strengthen rule of law and a free press and have had a large number of russian journalist who have fled
russia working with us and others in europe to try to ensure there is independent russian-language news we also work with lgbt writes. >> moving to the arctic climate change is changing and russia has 4,000 miles of coastline north of the arctic circle agent to deploy a certain weapons systems. what are we doing to respond to the militarization of the arctic? >> you are absolutely right. russia has invested significantly in the capabilities over the last several years with other
parts of the arctic. we seek to preserve as a space for cooperation on scientific issues like a black car bin as a danger that poses to the arctic environment with other issues. however retake very seriously rushes capabilities including the possibility over time russia can create elements of the area bubble's if you will that would preclude other nations from being able to enjoy their freedom of navigation so we are investing in the 2017 budget that allows us to augment our posture in the arctic to develop the capabilities to
help the signature freedom of navigation for flight for our troops in this region. >> and to minimize the potential of conflict it does seem like russia is investing a lot bin territorial claims in the arctic. >> we do have a good working relationship where we tried to preserve including environmental cooperation and has a search and rescue agreement with a counterpart that has worked very successfully and that the same time developing your own military capabilities
and russia was aggressiveness and revising history and communications to change the narrative of the reality and how we encounter that to have the of pretty strong impact to make sure people understand what are the facts and would welcome your response for the record in response to the record statement with us debt crisis we may start charging tickets. but in all seriousness i hope we have many more like this with russia and china of a rise of the traditional rivals are concerning to people back home.
i've a fall opening of the hybrid warfare. what lessons do we think we have learned after 80 years? the russians have a history to create these conflicts where without a peace treaty everything is normal that next year it is rumored to be having a referendum about joining russia again so russia keeps putting this on there and i am concerned but james clapper testified said the sinn is that increasing risk from pressure and and i visited serbia last year between the georgian defense minister and i heard her concerns of the ongoing pressure in georgia her coalesces have we learned?
and though the national guard has had the deployment and from that dod stamp weight relative to georgia and what have we learned relative to the ukraine? >> i completely agree with your assessment that russia is putting pressure on georgia through different means it currently occupies 20 percent of georgian territory. >> it is a significant portion in those boundary lines that it continues to shift cleaning ever more
pieces of territory it is also putting pressure and a variety of other ways including the desire to have a referendum on russia but our goal since the russian invasion is to build the resilience to reduce the of older abilities we spend $480 million since the crisis. i was in tbilisi to participate in a noble partner exercise we conduct wary we had 650 troops and 150 u. k troops where we had air board jumps into georgia and takes as well as the bradley infantry to develop
the capabilities over the course of the last 10 years georgia has contributed to the nato efforts especially in afghanistan up until recently the second-largest contributor after the united states and in fact, they have suffered 32 casualty's and 282 wounded with a major sacrifice and our training program has ben prepared to prepare the troops including iraq and afghanistan but now we're starting to position herself to trade the troops for self-defense. >> do we have permitted troops on the ground? >> we don't plan to but we do plan to increase the tempo of exercises and