tv Politics and Public Policy Today CSPAN April 5, 2016 11:00am-1:01pm EDT
i think it's something like 20 different corporations will be exercising with us, the guard, state, local. >> that's what i'm getting to. it's almost as if your military exercises have to involve all of these players. so they have a better understanding of their vulnerabilities and the nature of the attack that would occur. and the other question i have is to what extent are we looking at state and local governments as a way to at least, in north carolina i served in the legislature, we were talking about what we could do to work on cyber threats. i saw it also as an economic advantage. if states became good at grid-hardening or at securing the physical presences and cyberthreats, within their state borders, they create an economic advantage for people to set up business in those states. to what extent are we trying to lead and help make this problem
a little less difficult at the federal level to make sure that the states are stepping up. >> one of the reasons why there's a big guard component to this effort. to insure we can try to address this state and local aspect of this. >> thank you, i have a million dlimpb questiondifferent questi think what i'll do is try to schedule some time to go over this in a secured setting. thank you very much. >> thank you, mr. chairman. one of the issues is in fact the services being able within their resources, to fully develop the units that they will detach to you essentially, since you won't have your organic units. can you give us an assessment of where they are in terms of doing that?
across the services? >> that really goes to the heart of readiness, if you will. and one of the -- in september when i was with you, one of the things that i said during that session was that i thought one of the reasons why '16 was going to be such a big game-changer, i thought we would get more involved in the breadth of total capability sets. and we needed to focus from a shift on i.o.c. to f.o.c. are we ready to employ this. we have spent the last six months working our way through how do you define readiness in the cyber arena down to the individual team level. so that i as a commander have an awareness of what the true capabilities of the force is and using the same mechanisms to assess readiness across the d.o.d. i can provide policy makers and decision makers, a true picture of what this force is capable of doing. we've just started doing that,
i've gone through two strawmen with the team. we'll do a third and final one this summer. by the end of the summer in september i'll start providing to the d.o.d. on a quarterly basis by team. here's where we are in terms of true readiness. >> is the nightmare scenario that's one of these nations acquires capability to shut down satellites? >> there's two scenarios that concern me. one is, the physical shut-down and interdiction of capability. the other scenario that i -- >> explain the first one. >> if you were to shut down look at it from first manerod.o.d. perspective. much of what we rely on for our enablers as a department is commercial infrastructure, power, our ability to move force, for example. if you were able to take that away or materially impact the
ability to manage an air traffic control system. to manage the overhead structure and the flow of communications or data for example, that would materially impact d.o.d.'s ability to execute its mission. let alone the broader economic impact for us as a nation. the other concern i have is to date, most penetrations of systems that we've seen by actors have either been to steal data, or to do reconnaissance. what happenes if the purpose of the intrusion becomes to manipulate the data? and so you can no longer believe what you are seeing? think about the implications of that, if you couldn't trust the military picture that you were looking at. that you're using to base decisions on. and let alone the broader economic impacts for us as a nation. >> senator shaheen? >> thank you, mr. chairman and thank you, admiral for being here and for the job that you're doing every day to protect the country. i want to first start with a
statement you made in earlier i think to a question from senator mccain about does russia have the cassity to inflict serious harm to our infrastructure and you said yes. do we have capacity to inflict serious harm to russia's infrastructure? >> in an unclassified hearing, i'd rather not get into that if i could, ma'am. >> but i, let me put it in the context of, i assume there is some mutual deterrence that goes on when we're talking about some state actors. >> again it's a lot more complicated than just a yes or a no. >> okay. well i hope that we will be able to ask that question in a classified setting. i had the opportunity over the last two weeks to visit estonia. which is as you know, one of the most wired countries in the world and also probably the first victim of cyberattack by a nation state.
by russia. and i had the opportunity to visit the cyber center that's been accredited by nato. to hear them talk about how they think about cyber issues. and can you talk a little bit about how cybercom works with our nato allies. >> i was just in brussels in december and i, as u.s. cyber command, i addressed the north atlantic council. i was one of the member nations, i was asked to talk to the leadership of the alliance about implications of cyber and how lengthy and large, first to acknowledge that. how might the alliance work its way forward as we try to deal with the the cyber arena. cyber command, i try to partner with the alliance as a whole as well as specific member nations on specific issues within the alliance. what i've suggested to nato is i think the real key is you got to get the defensive house together
number one. and then secondly -- >> explain a little more what you mean when you say that. >> much like we've seen on the u.s. side, i've said look, i see nato as spending a lot of time and it's a good thing. focused on the defense of nato's fixed infrastructure. but i also remind them that i think there's value in spending time thinking about for example as nato is creating additional capability, additional force constructs to be able to apply traditional capability in a much faster way. i've also been part of discussions where i remind them, even as you're generating the additional force, additional capability, you need to be thinking about the cyberdefense implications of that. we can spend a lot of money on generating new capability, but it can quickly he negate its abilities to be used. we're dealing with the same challenges, i've had those discussions with the alliance
writ large. >> and so how do we increase their participation in training exercises like cyberflag? >> so for cyberflag, for example, we have some nato nations that participate in cyberflag, which is sust cybercommand's largest exercise. i won't say we have all 28 member nations at cyberflag. we over time you'll see more and more nations participating. one of the things i've talked to nato about, although we haven't yet flished out the how is how might we go about taking a look at a cyberexercise or training regi regime. i'll be the first to admit this is just a preliminary discussion. when i was there in december i said hey look, this is something we need to be thinking about. >> one of the things i was really interested in estonia was hearing about their estonian defense league. and you were talking about earlier in your testimony, about
the effort to take advantage of the expertise in the private sector to help us as we're looking at cyberissues, and i was very interested, one of the things i heard was that the reality is we can't completely prevent a cyberattack. so what we've really got to do is be prepared to respond to that attack in the way that is most effective and most fastest, and they were talking about their defense league as one way that they are able to do that. is that something that recognizing that we're probably not talking about, but is that what you're looking at when you're talking about the teams that were being set up to help respond. >> it's a little different in the sense that the idea behind the cyberleague for estonia is you have private citizens who volunteer, on a voluntarily basis, will apply themselves at specific problem sets. as they emerge. kind of after-hours, after work
on their own time. that's kind of the model for the cyberleague in estonia. and they use that to augment their government and private-sector capabilities. on the u.s. side for us in the d.o.d. that cyberleague i would argue is a cross for us in our structures between the digital service arena that d.o.d. is creating, as well as the kind of guard construct. although the difference is, when the estonians doing do it you're doing it purely on your own time, purely not as a uniformed member of the guard and reserve so to speak. so it is not exactly the same. but the thought process that the idea of trying to tap that is similar. >> thank you. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you. chairman, i want to thank you admiral rodgers for your service to the country. i wanted to just ask you a basic question. you have substantial
responsibility in your position. what keeps you up at night? what are the things, what is your most worried about that we need to understand? >> well leetlet me be a bit of a smart ass, say based on the workload, i have no problems sleeping. but there's three things i highlight. one is actions taken against critical infrastructure of the united states, damage or manipulation. number two, what happens when actors start to no longer just enter systems to do reconnaissance, or to steal, but actually to manipulate or change data, so we no longer can believe what we're seeing and the third and final thing in the cyberarena is what happens when nonstate actors start to view cyber as a weapons system and they want to use it as a vehicle to inflict pain and against the states and others. >> to the point you just made about nonstate actors using cyber as a weapons system.
how grave a threat is that to us currently? >> i would argue that it is not you know, it's one of these things you say it and tomorrow something will change. but today i what i would tell you is we have not seen groups yet make huge investments in this. but i worry that it's a matter of time. it wouldn't take long. one of the challenges to cyber is that we talked about how it doesn't recognize boundaries, it doesn't take billions of dollars of investment. it doesn't take decades of time and it doesn't take a dedicated wo wo wo workforce of tens of thousands of people. it's the great equalizer in ways. >> what's the greatest risk to our infrastructure, the first issue that you talked about. >> in that regard what i worry is based on the accesses and activity that i've seen of some nation state actors out there, what happens if they decide that
they want to for some period of time, disrupt the things we take for granted? the ability to always have power? pumps. >> power system. >> financial system. >> to move money. if you take a look at the scenario in the ukraine on the 22nd of december, imagine had a scenario like that unfolded in the united states? i'm in the going to argue that someone is capable of making the united states totally go dark. but i would argue there's capability there to cause significant impact and damage. >> uh-huh. that's why you discussed in your opening testimony, the need for the coordination between government, private sector and across the whole of government. >> right. >> i wanted to ask you, the law that was changed by congress, in terms of the nsa, holding of information, the usa freedom act. >> yes, ma'am. >> can you give us an update on
what is happening with that? and whether that's working? and any concerns you have? i think it's an important question for us to check back in with you on. >> if i could in an unclassified hearing, i'm no not going to go into great detail. what i've said in the intelligence oversight committees, we have been able to comply with the act and to do it on time. there has been some level of slowness, but that in terms of difference from the old system to the new system. >> terms of how quickly you can get information? >> that time duration is minutes or hours. it's not days or weeks. so it hasn't yet gotten to the point where i felt i've needed to come back to the congress or the administration and say look, i'm seeing a significant material impact in our ability to generate timely insights. i made that commitment. i said if i saw that, i believe i owe it to the nation to make that point. i have not seen that yet. >> there's no doubt that it's taking longer in some ways? >> in some ways.
it takes longer. >> well i think it is important for you to come to us with that. because you know given the minutes and hours can make a difference, when it comes to terrorist attacks and preventing them and taking action, i think this is really important for all of us to understand, given the world that we are living in. i want to ask you a final question about the jcpoa, or the iran deal. in there there's a provision that said that the u.s. must cooperate with tehran through training and workshops to strengthen iran's ability to prevent sabotage of its nuclear program? >> i cannot speak for the u.s. government as a whole. i can tell you u.s. cyber command has not participated in any such efforts. >> okay. thank you. >> thank you, mr. chair. thank you, admiral rogers. i have missed some of the
discussion i don't want to be needlessly repetitive. i want to go back to an interchange you had with the chair in the opening questions that he asked. i met recently with a senior military leader who kind of tried to basically summarize his sense of things. he said we have all plans, but no strategy. i've been thinking about that. i think in your back and forth with the chair, you talked about and i think others may have asked you about this a little bit, this notion that we're kind of reacting case by case to cyberattacks and kind of deciding in each instance what we want to do but the development of a broader doctrine. what will a det yens poerrence be. >> could you talk to us about the doctrinal development
process and in working on these questions, they're so important. what might we expect from the pentagon, from cybercommand in our interaction, in our oversight in terms of the development of doctrines that have greater clarity and aren't just kind of pragmatically reacting? >> you'll see in the d.o.d. cyberstrategies for example, we've got a broad over-arching framework about how we're going to develop capability and then employ it. we're part cybercommand is part of the broader dialogue within the department about how do we align the capabilities of force with the world that we're seeing today. one of the arguments that we've made over the course of the last six months is we need to take an element of the cybercapability we're generating and focusing it very much on the det yens piece. how do we shapeerrence piece. how do we shape behaviors before we get to the crisis scenario. we're in the early stages of
that. but i'm heartened by the fact that we now have broad agreement that that's an important part of our strategy and we need to be doing that. we're just starting the early stages of that journey. the department participates in the broader dialogue within the u.s. government as to about how from a national policy perspective, how we're going to move forward in addressing some of the issues that you have all raised today. meanwhile, for me as u.s. cyber command. what i remind our team is we know that capability is going to be part of that deterrent strategy, guys tharks what we get paid to do. we've got to focus own genera generating that ability today. that's kind of been if you will the focus for u.s. cybercommand at the operational level that i and the team really focus at. >> let me ask you another question, i think senator shaheen may have asked you this with rb rp to nato. another item that's common in
this committee, as we look at the postures of other commands, joint training exercises, india does more joint training with the united states than any other nation, we have marines deployed throughout africa and special purpose of training of african militaries. what's our posture vis-a-vis partners in the cyber area, in the training we do together, in the development of joint resiliency strategies? >> so we do some level of training with key allies. one of the challenges for us, quite frankly is how do you mack miz capacity. you cannot do everything with every nation that you would like to do. part of our strategy is how do you focus the greatest return? what are the nations you want to start with? we have done that, the other challenge i find is, this is part of an ongoing internal discussion for us, based on where we are in the journey right now, i can't do so much with the external world that it negatively impacts our internal
ability within the department to generate. unlike some mission sets where we have decades of infrastructure capability, capacity and experience, we don't have that in the cyberarena. the same force and capability i'm using to help train and partner with foreign counterparts, i'm still building every day. that's the challenge for us right now. i don't think it will be as much an issue in the future as that capacity fully comes online. but we're not there yet. >> uh-huh. we trained aviators out of other service branches and then we created an air force acadny in 1954 and decide weird going to train aviators, not that we don't train aviators in the other service branches. i think senator mccain may have had some training somewhere in his past we created an air force after world war ii. i've wondered whether the cyber domain would have eventually become so significant that there may be the need to consider creating a dedicated cyber academy. much like the air force was
created in the '50s. the question is you can train cyber folks everywhere and have them percolate throughout the service branches or you can focus on a particular cyber expertise and those folks could go into the different service branches. has there been any discussion or thought about that? >> it's been a discussion. my input to that discussion has been i'm not right now based on my experience and what i see a proponent of that approach. my concern is to maximize effectiveness in cyber you need to understand how it fits in a broader context. and i watch at times when i deal that elements in our own workforce, who are incredibly technically savvy, incredibly smart about the aegis of the mission, when i try to remind them, remember we're applying this as part of a broader strategy and a broader context. when you don't understand the broader context, you're not in my experience, not as effective. that's my concern about that approach it will start to make us very, very -- >> siloed.
>> narrow and siloed. i'm concerned about the potential implications of that. >> admiral rodgers, thank you for appearing again before the committee. if i heard you correctly, you testified to center ayotte that your three main they'res were krets to our critical infrastructure, the ability to manipulate systems such that we might not have faith in their operations and third, nonstate actors using cyber as a weapon against the united states. is that accurate? >> yes, sir. >> are either of the islamic state or al qaeda able to do any of those three things at this point? >> i haven't seen them yet. but my concern is that's now. the islamic state has a reputation of being effective online. we we infer online recruiting and propaganda is a skill set from the use of cyber against electrical power grids and so forth? >> yes, sir. >> how hard would it be for a
nonstate actor like the islamic state or al qaeda to develop that skill set? is it nothing more than recruiting the right person? >> it would not be difficult. recruiting the right people with the right focus. it's certainly not be on beyond their ability. i believe. it's not beyond their ability. if they made that decision. >> when we think about other potential nonstate actors, are those, do those groups that have that capability or approaching the capability tend to be associated with state actors? in some cases, yes, but not in all. not in all. >> i want to turn now to the ongoing debate about encryption. think data security and cybersecurity is obviously critical in the modern world. most people in this room probably have a smartphone in his pocket. even my 70-year-old father got a smartphone recently. we keep emails, text messages, phone calls, financial information -- >> he's ahead of senator graham.
>> on our phones, i think data and cybersecurity is essential. i think physical security is essential, i would hate to see americans get blown to pieces because we had an imbalanced priority of cybersecurity over physical security. how do we strike that balance as a society? >>y first comment would be i don't think it's either/or. >> my argument would be we don't serve either viewpoint particularly well when we cast this as well. it's all or nothing, it's either/or. my view is over time we have been able to integrate ground-changing technology in the course of our nation, and to do it in a way that enables the nation under the right circumstances with the right level of control, to be able to access that. for me, my starting position is, what is it that is different about this, that would preclude
that from applying here? i don't personally see that. even as i acknowledge there's no one simple answer, there's probably no one silver bullet. it's not going to be a one size fits all. but i look at the innovation and the can-do approach we have as a nation and i'm thinking we can solve this. >> like for instance a decades-old law known as the communications assistance for law enforcement act. which tells telecom companies of any size if they want to construct a telephone system in this country, it has to be susceptible to a wiretap pursuant to a court order if the court finds probable cause to order a wiretap against a terror suspect or a human trafficker or a drug dealer or so forth. similarly we all expect privacy in our bank accounts, but banks must maintain systems that they it turn over financial information subject to a court order on a potential money launderer. is there any data that says we
should treat tech companies different than telephone companies or banks. >> i like you, i just say look, we've got frameworks in other areas, why can't we apply that here? >> these questions have been about the larger debate about encryption going forward, the way smartphones are designed, messaging systems are designed there was a case recently involving apple and the fbi and the san bernardino shooter in which the fbi requested apple's assistance to override a feature of an iphone, apple refused, fbi found a third party capable of doing so and has withdrawn that case. should americans be alarmed at this kind of vulnerability in such a widely-used device? >> the way i would phrase it is -- vulnerability is an inherent nature of the technical world that we live in today. and if you desire is to live in a world without vulnerability i would say that is probably highly unlikely. >> do you know if we've shared
that vulnerability with apple? >> as u.s. cybercommand, sir, i apologize, i don't know. >> admiral, one other point. we know for a fact that baghdadi is sending young men into the refugee flow to commit acts of terror. wherever they can locate. is it true or very likely that they also know of a website to come up on. secure so that they can communicate back with baghdadi and his -- tech? >> yes. so right now there's a media report that 400 young men had been sent into the refugee flow i would assume then that at least some of them have are armed with a website to come up
on once they get to a preferred destination so that they can coordinate acts of terrorism. >> a website or encrypted app. yes, that's probably likely. >> that's a bit concerning, isn't it? >> yes, sir. >> so what should we be doing to counter that? besides take out isis? >> i think we need a broader national dialogue about what are we comfortable with it's not either/or. we've got to have security and we've got to have safety and prifscy and at the moment we're in a dialogue that seems to paint it as well it's one or the other. and as the dialogue we just had with senator cotton, i don't see it that way. >> yet we know of a direct threat of an attack in europe or the united states technical
capability to enhance their ability to commit this act of terrorism. isn't that a pretty tough -- so we need a national conversation? do we need more hearings? do we need to urge the administration to come up with a policy? what are our options here? >> the worst-case scenario to me is we don't have the deialogu and we have major event and in the aftermath of a major event we decide to do something that perhaps that in the breadth of time we step back and ask ourselves, how did we ever get here? >> i don't think there's any doubt that that's a likely scenario. >> that's what i hope it doesn't come to. to date for a variety of reasons we've been unable to achieve that kind of consensus. we've got to figure out how we're going to do this. and you don't want a law enforcement -- i believe, you
don't want a law enforcement individual or an intelligence individual dictating this. just as i don't believe you don't want the private sector, a company dictating this. this is too important from my perspective. >> is awareness of this threat important for the american people to know how serious this threat is? >> yes. >> nor king? >> mr. chairman, hearing this dialogue and the discussion you've just been having, it strikes me it underlying the foolishness of continuing to be governed by budget decisions made six years ago. when this threat was nothing like the magnitude that it is today. and here we are dealing with a major new threat and trying to fit it within, to shoehorn it within a budget structure that was, that clearly did not take account of the fact that we've got a major new threat and a
serious one, and it's going to take resources to nfront. i just can't help but make that point. it underlying the fact that we're trying to be governed by decisions made at a time when circumstances were very different than they are today. >> i think senator king, but admiral rogers has made it clear in this testimony that sequestrati sequestration will prevent him from carrying out completely the missions that he's been tasked with. is that correct, admiral? >> yes, sir. my greatest concern if you went to sequestration would be the impact on the workforce, particularly the civilians. who would argue is this what i want to be aligned with? i can replace equipment. it takes us years to replace people. >> there is a real likelihood that if we continue the sequestration, that you will
have to -- you will not be able to continue to employ these outstanding and highly selective individuals? >> yes. >> sometimes, admiral, i do not want the american people to see what goes on at these hearings. the old line about laws and sausages. i certainly wish the american people could hear and see your statements that you're making today. rather than as you just stated, an attack and then we always overreact. that that's just democracies are all about. and so i thank you for your good work. but i also want to thank you for your straightforward answers to questions that were, that were posed by the members of this committee.
president obama's supreme court nominee merritt garland and c-span's capitol hill producer krig kaplan maine senator susan collins is the second republican and the 11th senate senator overall to meet with judge marek on capitol hill. mitch mcconnell said the senate would not vote on filling the vacancy until a new president is elected.
coming up on c-span defense secretary ashton carter will discuss this afternoon efforts to modernize his department. he's speaking at the center for strategic and international studies here in washington. you can see live coverage of that at 1:00 p.m. eastern on our companion network, c-span. the wisconsin primary live coverage begins tonight at 9:00 eastern. tune in for election results, candidate speeches and viewer reaction, taking on the race for the white house. >> our c-span campaign 2016 bus continues to make stops around the country. recently our bus visited metropolitan arts institute in phoenix, arizona to present winners from the west division. for their first prize video rethinking reform, prisons in
america. their classmates won second prize for their video on gender wage inequity in the workplace. our campaign 2016 bus stopped in los angeles, for a ceremony for third prize winner before heading to palo alto, elk grove and rockland, california to present winners in those areas with awards. c-span extends a special thanks to our cable partners for their help in coordinator our student camp individuals vitss in the community. every day this month on c-span be sure to watch one of the top 21 winning entries at 6:50 a.m., before "washington journal." cbs's mark knoller tweeting 0 out that the president obama will make an announcement with the treasury department's inversion rules. we'll have live coverage of that announcement ahead of today's white house briefing at 12:15 eastern. while we wait for that to get
under way, a segment from this morning's washington journal" and a look at the road to the white house. >> those in the badger state are getting ready to vote in wisconsin today. joining us from that state is john sly sylvester, the host of the drive home with sly on wbgr fm 93.7 as well as am station 1380 wbl. you're supporting bernie sanders, tell us why. >> well, bernie sanders has been coming to wisconsin for a very long time. i have to say the thing that tipped the scales for me is his opposition to these free trade deals that have stripped wisconsin of probably 130,000 jobs. i think he is i appreciate his position and opposition to the iraq war. i just think he's got his finger on the pulse of what's going
wrong with the country. i think there's a lot of democrats that frankly look the other way when barack obama, who came here in 2008, promised to renegotiate nafta. and not to do trade deals like george w. bush and bill clinton and he turned around and did the same thing. that upset me a great deal. i had supported barack obama, i believed him. and i frankly don't trust hillary clinton to do what's right on that issue. not considering who she's taking the money from. because wall street loves these free trade deals that have stripped us of our economic strength here in wisconsin. >> that sounds like it was the defining issue for you to not choose hillary clinton. >> right. it's a whole host of issues. but i will tell you that's the one that is so important here. and bernie sanders has tapped into something here. obviously because last night i saw two or three of his ads, it was that issue he was focusing on. >> if hillary clinton does end
up as being the nominee and right now she's far ahead in the delegate count, will you support her? will you be satisfied as people like to ask those going into vote in the exit polls? >> i won't be satisfied. i'm very frustrated with this situation. i don't like the super delegates and i haven't decided who i'm going to vote for in november. that's going to be circumstantial. if she has a 20-point lead, i may make a statement and vote for someone like jill stein. if it's very close, obviously with the supreme court hanging in the balance, i would obviously make the pragmatic move to vote for her. and i'm also waiting to see what she does. bernie sanders made a promise not to sign the tpp and secretary clinton has said in fact she will oppose it, but i'd like to see her name on the dotted line. if she does that, i would be more inclined to vote for her. >> do you think she does need to do that, in order to win over not just you, but more voters who are supporting bernie sanders? >> i think there is a, show me
the money sort of situation there. i don't think many people know that bernie sanders has signed that. but i think she needs to make a statement that she's really serious about this. and of course, i'm not opposed to trade. but the way these agreements are written, workers are given short shrift. and frankly the president's dismissal of elizabeth warren's concerns about this was problematic as well. russ feingold is trying to get his old u.s. senate seat back. his wisconsin senate seat. but he is running very strongly on this issue. and he's been leading in the polls, think partly because of it. >> when it comes to trade, we've heard from our viewers saying they see similarity between bernie sanders. some bernie sanders supporters have said if he doesn't get the nomination, i'm not going to vote for hillary clinton i'm going to vote for donald trump because he's saying similar things about trade. could you do the same?
>> no, donald trump has disqualified himself for president with his, his remarks about islams and other groups of people. he's not qualified to be president, i don't think he's taking it seriously. i do think he struck a chord on trade. i'm not sure he exactly knows what the problem is. he said our negotiators were stupid. i say those trade deals were a trojan horse and they knew exactly what they were doing. and they had the desired effect. it's not like this was some mystery. ross perot was right. but i will never vote for donald trump. not that i'm not mildly entertained by him. and he certainly has been making wisconsin a more interesting place the last couple weeks. but i would never vote for him. >> we have a fourth line this morning, sly, for wisconsin voters, we want to hear from them, how they plan to vote today, who they're supporting. what do you say to voters who are looking right now, trying to
decide maybe, who they vote for in this democratic nominating process, and they're looking at the delegate count, and hillary clinton, when you add the super delegates, which i know you don't think is fair, but the gap is pretty wide between her and bernie sanders. so how is there, is are they wasting their vote by voting for bernie sanders? >> well you never waste a vote. voting is sometimes, not voting for the person that's going to be the ultimate nominee, but to make a statement and to keep the pressure on the establishment. hillary clinton is the establishment. but bernie sanders by attracting all these supporters, and all these votes, is shaping the message. hillary clinton's message has shaped by bernie sanders. he's driving this campaign. she isn't. she's reacting. i would just like to see her make some iron-clad promises, bernie sanders has had an incredible effect on this race. he may not be the ultimate nominee.
although he still see as path forward, but he is shaping this race, if you're not paying attention to what's going on right now, with these crowds, and the way he's driving the conversation, then you are whistling past the graveyard. because people are fed up. sometimes there are fads in politics, but i think a lot of people are involved right now for bernie and trump to some extent, out of necessity. >> the "washington post" would like to see this from bernie sanders, put more meat on the slogans. another democratic debate should let mr. sanders fill in some of those blanks. this is what they write, just as it would be useful to hear more details from mr. sanders on the agenda. voters would benefit from understanding what tradeoffs his health plan would entail. how he justifies how his financial seconder's business model is fraud if he's to be more than a protest candidate, he owes voters a richer understanding of his views.
on america's role in the world. >> well, let me say the "washington post" owes wisconsin an explanation as to why they and so many other corporate-owned newspapers have supported the very policies that have closed factories that were here for 130 years. jonathan capehart in the "washington post" said an editorial board seems to think it's frif rouse that we lose jobs here every time the washington establishment supports deals that are written for corporations. free trade is a slogan. they owe us an explanation as to why they don't care about fly-over country. that said, i do think bernie sanders sometimes could get into a few more details on some of the proposals that he makes. i think that's a valid criticism of any candidate. >> let's get to our first call. arthur is waiting in new york. you're going to be voting after wisconsin. good morning.
>> caller: yes, i'm voting for hillary, because i know her and i am low income. i live it, i need someone who can get things done. i want to know why the media doesn't bet senator sanders, sly here says that they distort so much on hillary. they say, he said that bernie's got all of these supporters. well hillary, we have got two and a half million more votes. the people are voting for hillary, not bernie. that's a big distortion. whether they want to vet senator sanders and talk about his extremist past. they were smearing hillary, that when she was a teenager she was a republican with her father as a goldwater girl but as an adult when he was 30, senator sanders was an elector for the socialist workers party in 1980. not supporting carter, but he voted, he helped trickle down ronald reagan get elected by his cynical left.
he was always protesting, he never did anything. you know he, i would vote for him but he would lose worse than mcgovern. if he was unfortunately nominated. >> arthur i want sly to take the last nominated >> okay, authur, i want slooi to take that last point. he would vote for him but he would lose. >> that contradicts the previous five statements that our thur made. bernie sanders is polling better against the republicans. no one knows what's going to happen in the general election because no one knows who the republicans are going to nominate. michael duka kis had a lead and then blew the election. there are a lot of things not determined. let me give a little perspective. i didn't come to politics as a left winger and i'm still not a left winger. i agree with bernie on guns. i happen to support the second
amendment. i and not an extremist when it comes to extremism. they've supported corporations over workers. and no state has been devastated more in the labor movement than wisconsin because of scott walker's attacks. bernie sanders did po tres a lot of things. you know what? time has proven him right. >> so sly, are you -- would you call yourself a progressive? would you call yourself a moderate? >> labels only go so far. but wisconsin has a rich history of progressivism with fighting day lords nelson, but wisconsin also has a very extreme right wing history as well with jo mccarthy and scott walker. it's a bit of a polarized state. if i had to accept a label, it would be progressive, not
liberal. >> would you say hillary clinton is a progressive? >> no. he's the liberal. >> and the difference? >> i think liberals are good at protecting the safety net and focus more on issues such as apportion, some of the social issues. i think progressivism is about empowering workers and building government from the ground up rather than a more paternal look at politics. >> okay. well, joe anne, a democrat. how do you plan to vote today? >> caller: i will vote for hillary clinton. i've known sly for many years. i've marched with sly as a union organizer. but i'm very concerned about the types of rhetoric, anti-women rhetoric and anti-childcare rhetoric, anti-women's issues rhetoric that's coming not only from sly but from a lot of the talk show hosts in wisconsin.
the tone of it is offputting and it's hard to speak on his show. it's hard to speak on these shows without being called a limousine liberal. i'm concerned about the months to come in which i will be working for hard to get hillary clinton in office and the attacks that i'm getting from the bernie bros. it's hard to go online to put in comments that are pro-hillary and not be openly attacked. >> do you want me to respond to that? >> please, do. >> all right. i don't know whether joanne has tried calling the show but i take calls from people i disagree with all the time. i haven't shot anyone down. and i haven't made any re marks about hillary regarding her gender. maybe i made fun of her pants suits. women's jobs are affected just
the same way as men's are when they are shipped oversees or you support things bad for consumer rights. corporate policies affect both genders. hillary clinton is not a victim and the people who support her have been giving as good as they get. >> you said you're not sure what you'll do in bernie sanders does not get the nomination. you might write in another candidate. >> well i'll vote for a woman regardless this fall. jill stein is a perfectly capable person, a graen party candidate. her views are far closer to mine than hillary clinton's. but i'll have to make the determination of what's at stake and how close the race is. by the way, if wisconsin is really close this fall, hillary clinton is in really big trouble. >> why? e plain that. >> because she should be able to put wisconsin away pretty comfortably. wisconsin is the tale of two states. in off-year elections wisconsin
leengs republican because there's a much lower turnout and wealthier, whiter people tend to vote especially in the ring of fire, the suburbs around milwaukee county. in pedestrian dental races the map expands and it turns out that more people of color and lower income people come out and vote and wisconsin has voted for every democratic nominee since 1988 starting with michael cue kau kis. >> if she gets the nomination and running against donald trump, then do you not use your radio show, the podium that you have to help democrats defeat donald trump? do you sit on the sidelines? >> my radio show isn't predicated on me being used as a tool for the democratic party. i am a member of the democratic party. i have been for a very long time but i don't get any talking points from the party as many
conservative hosts do and i'm not going to carry water for someone that i don't think would be a good president. and i don't think hillary clinton would be a good president. in a lot of ways she he minds me of richard nixon some i think she's seek ty, shifty, i think she's deceptive. she appears to not have any type of soul when it comes to thinking for herself. she's always trying to catch whatever she thinks is popular. that said, i know she would pick better justices than donald trump or good forbid ted cruz. if it's close, i will vote for her. if it's not, i would like to make a statement that i don't think everything is okay with the democratic party, i'm tired of being lied to and i'm tried of workers being put last in the equation of voting. i shouldn't say voting. but in the con sich whencies of the democratic party. unfortunately bill clinton made sure that the only group that he
always took care of were groups supporting abortion rights. there's nothing wrong with that. my mother worked for planned parenthood. there's more to being a democratic than being pro-choice and safety net. bill clinton kid more damage to labor than scott walker could have dreamed to. >> we're talking with john sly sylvester, the host of his radio showed "the drive home." also on the am dial, wbel 1380 talking your questions and comments as wisconsin prepares to vote here. phil in silver spring, maryland. independent. hi, phil. >> caller: how are you doing. thanks for having me on the show. first of all i would like to say that i'm king hillary from a to z and beyond. i believe she's well-experienced. the second point is this. there are people in the camp of mr. sanders who say all the time
that if and when. mrs. clinton becomes the nominee they will choose to vote for somebody else. that's very undemocratic. however, there are people like myself in mrs. clinton's camp who believe strongly that sanders, if and when he becomes the nominee, it's for me, for instance, it's going to be negative one, minus one. so many of any colleagues are saying precisely the same thing. it is only part of mr. sanders people to make it look as if those who have in hillary's camp do not have any place to go. that is false. if and when sanders becomes the nominee, i believe he is not as experienced as mrs. clinton, i will stay home. that's my observation. >> okay, phil. sly, what's your thoughts? >> well, you can vote for whoever you want. i wouldn't try to convince you to vote for anyone. people are free to choose who
they vote for. i would like to see america have a multiparty system where more parties are involved. i think more parties should be involved in the debates this fall. that said, mrs. clinton is the most unpopular presumptive democratic nom nominee in many, many, many years. independents are not flocking to her. she's got a lot of baggage and problems. bernie sanders is not a perfect vessel or vehicle. but ask yourself this question. had elizabeth warren ran this year would hillary clinton still be in this race? i don't think so. >> ralph in d.c., a democrat. you're next. >> caller: i wish you were broadcasting in washington, d.c. y you're a breath of fresh hair. bernie sanders warned us before and nobody listened.
the asian deal is going to take away a lot of ratings, and there's a whole bunch of other tax things in there for corporations and that's a solid deal. the middle class is getting screwed all of the time. you know, we've got an inflation rate which we're being lied to. there's a website called shadow stats. it's pushing the middle class into higher and higher tax brackets which used to be a $50,000 income is now a 100,0$10 income. and then, you know, we get hillary saying, i'm a great person. you know, she's one of these people who pull out -- a race issue and she uses it to get herself higher within the democratic party. she sat on her butt painting her
nails. in the meantime bernie sanders is out there getting it head busted when it wasn't a popular issue and wasn't going to push him forward. it's the principle. that's what i like about him. i can't tell where hillary is because she changes her message every time the wind blow. >> that was a democrat in washington. i want to get in maureen and i'll have you react to both. go ahead maureen. >> caller: early sly said if hillary clinton promised she would be up against the upcoming trade deals he would be more inclined to vote for her. >> i can't believe anyone would say anything that woman says. she was able to lie to the victims parents of benghazi, i mean lie straight to their face. she's the most corrupt politician in american history. i don't see how he could ever, no matter what she says on trade policies, vote for her.
>> sly, go ahead. >> well, as long as being the most corrupt politician in american history, there's a lot of competition in that department and i don't think mrs. clinton is the most corrupt politician in american history. what i'm saying is if she signs on the bottom line. that's how important it is to stop the transatlantic partnership. there would still have to be some leap of faith there. i'm also concerned that they'll try to sneak the tpp in through a lame duck session while the republic senate and the president are outgoing. i'm very troubled by that. but i truly believe that mrs. clinton -- i don't think she's 100% negative. there are a lot of people in politics that are more deceptive. but i don't think she would be the gold standard. for a lot of women that feel it's important to have a female president, i completely agree.
but i don't really like the way she's conducted herself throughout her career. and i don't really like being called a sexist because i don't support her. i have a history of supporting women who run for public office. and it's important that they get there. i just don't think she's a very good vehicle and i don't think identity politics is going to solve the problems this country is facing right now. we're in an economic death spiral when it comes to the middle class. no state in the country has lost a larger percentage of its middle class than the state of wisconsin. >> anita, san antonio, democrat. good morning to you. you're on the air. >> caller: good morning. i support hillary clinton for a number of reasons. i think she would be the best leader. i think she understands how things are done. she understands how to use the leverage of power. very much like franklin delano
roosevelt. all establishment democrats who understood how to compromise in order to get things done. as far as these polls where bernie sanders is shown to be more likable or able to beat donald trump man than hillary clinton, bernie sanders has not been vetted at all. hillary clinton has been up against negative media attention from both sides, from people like you and from people like that woman that just called about this phony benghazi scandal and this things about hillary clinton being the most corrupt politician ever. >> i'm going to have sly respond. a couple things there, her ability to compromise like previous democratic presidents and then also that bernie sanders has been vetted by the media. >> well, that's partly true. he's running for president for the first time. he's in the primaries. in some respects the national
corporate media hasn't given him. attention he deserves. that would be good and bad. but they've done some vetting on him. they've called him a communist for god's sake. but as far as franklin roosevelt and lyndon johnson, if bill clinton and barack obama has been them, we would not have lost the jobs that we did. because neither of them would have signed and a half that or permanent trade e relations with china, they wouldn't have done those things that devastated our economy. you have to have compromise. but should the compromise always be at the expense of the american worker? in favor of corporations? and how convenient it is that they take wall street money and do that. look, bill clinton and barack obama never compromised on reproductive rights because
corporations don't care about reproductive rights or gay rights. but corporations want to drive wages down in this country and i'm tired of democratic presidents taking money from wall street and giving workers the short stick. workers keep falling behind and it didn't happen by accident. >> how do you respond, though, to economists and others who say that the job less in manufacturing began before nafta and it's largely due to technology and automation of jobs, productivity has increased. >> well, productivity has increased which is pretty incredible and of course automation has take an serious toll on the american workforce. but i will tell you, they left bread crumbs with these trade deals. the trade adjustment that workers get, that verifies when you lose your job because of a trade deal. we have the numbers of the
company, 66,000 factories, we have the numbers of workers and it's verified. the other thing that's hurt the american worker is right to work laws. jimmy carter could have stopped the southern states from poaching jobs from the north. they had an opportunity to do it, they didn't. the other thing, union busting. milwaukee was the epicenter of the workforce in america and yes they started busting unions and going after workers before they did the trade deals. but make no mistake, the frayed deals have cost us millions of jobs. so when the economists who supported the trade deals say that it's other things, they're right. but they better look in the mirror and realize that they made a terrible mistake. people like paul krugman who call themselves progressives ought to be ashamed of themselves for undercutting the american worker the way they did.
they hurt us. >> joining us from milwaukee, john shy sylvester, supporter of bernie sanders, host of his radio show "the drive home" taking your questions and comments here this morning. there's this headline in the "the new york times" this morning. wisconsin radio talkers on the conservative side unite to oppose trump. what do you make of the republican talk radio host who have been very critical of mr. trump and trying to stop him in the state of wisconsin? >> well that's interesting. these are the same people who do scott walker's bidding. they're mainly come out of milwaukee but they broadcast to the suburbs of milwaukee, not the city. they're very economically conservative, voices for corporations and there no doubt they're going to get kbhiend someone like ted cruz to stop donald trump. i think some of what they're doing is the survival of the
republican party and i understand that. they think trump will loose badly. but they don't like trump's message on trade, they don't like the fact that trump is saying he'll save social security. he is not cut from the same cloth. i thought it was interesting that right when talk show host charlie psychs basically got into it with congressman sean duf duffy, a republican from the state the other day, they were kind of arguing over wisconsin's i'd tie within the republican party. well sean duffy represents different people. republicans that live up north that are hurting economically have a different feel about economics than the wealthy people that live outside milwaukee. well the "the new york times" story says that perhaps the polls that we see right now with mr. trump trailing senator cruz in wisconsin by 10 points is due to the conservative radio talk shows hosts. a quote from mr. psychs, can
someone win without talk radio, he asked during one of his commercial breaks, yes, theoretically, except no one has. what's your reaction to that? >> he's right. talk radio on the republican side has a huge impact. but i will say, the one thing charlie psychs can't control in a republican primary is wisconsin's open primary. it's going to be very interesting today. there will be independents making a decision between trump and sanders. i think trump probably gets hurt a little bit by sanders' strength in wisconsin. but trump is drawing from a pool that doesn't necessarily follow along hook, line and sinker with milwaukee right wing radio. tlump could do a little better in wisconsin than some people expected. there are other polls that show him a little bit closer. >> ron in pennsylvania, independent, your turn. good morning. >> caller: morning. i just like to say i'm not a big
fan of hillary clinton, but you know, people say she lies and everything. which i -- you know, she does. i'm originally from new york. and back when she would run in new york, she would give speeches, we from new york -- she didn't live in new york. and then you go the libya deal where she's telling people nobody got hurt. bosnia, she was dodging sniper bullets. i mean, this woman, she can't get a straight story if she hads to. >> sly, what do you think? >> well, look. i think the sniper story is very troubling. i think the benghazi thing has been exploited for political purposes by the republicans. and maybe they put a little extra salsa on that one. but i will tell you, there's a moment in hillary clinton's political career -- first of all, i found it odd that the
clintons didn't go back to arkansas. here in wisconsin we're proud to be from our state. running off calling another state your home state for a political opportunity seems a little pa cue yar. but when she put the yankee hat on, that similar beizsymbolized something. it was hard for any to headache here seriously. she had clearly been a chicago kubs fan all of her life. it's indicative of a problem she has. she doesn't know who she is. and bernie sanders has taken some positions that radio extremely unpopular. but bernie sanders is willing to pay the price. hillary clinton never seems to be willing to pay the price for taking an up popular position. >> we'll go next to springfield,
virginia. democrat. good morning. >> caller: hi. yeah. everybody call hillary an opportunist. the most opportunist is actually bernie sanders. he's not a real democrat. he's an independent and that's the reason why he's not getting my vote. and there's no way bernie sanders can win. the problem is he was an independent and also he and -- bernie sanders and writing a book bashing obama. obama is a real democrat. hillary -- people like myself, we don't give hillary all of the
credit -- >> i want you to respond to that because that's a arguments that hillary clinton makes too. >> hillary clinton said in milwaukee that she's a real democrat. i don't know what that means anymore. was barack obama a real democrat when he cozied up to wall street and pushed for the tpp? is that being a real democrat? is failing to put glassed eagle back in place by the democrats like barack obama and hillary clinton, is that being a real democrat? is giving workers the short schiff being a real democratic? this isn't packers, versus vikings versus redskins. right now we have a problem because americans don't earn enough to live the type of comfortable middle class lives they used to. i'm sick of the pom poms. as i said, i've been a member of the democratic party since i was quite young. for years i believed that the
bill clintons of the world, the jimmy carters of the world, the barack obamas were going to look out for working people and they haven't. and frankly, i don't care what label they have in front of their name. that word democrat doesn't mean anything to me. >> rocket within an independent in greenville, north carolina. hello, sir. question or comment here. >> caller: my comment is that bernie sanders has been vetted. by the clinton machine and they can't find anything bad about him so what they try to do is make up things. and the corporate media has treated bernie sanders so poorly, the coverage he gets is ridiculous and people come on and lie about him, nobody call him out on it. and he gets so little coverage. people in third place in the republican party get more coverage than bernie sanders does. kasich is getting more coverage.
the corporate media and the democratic party are just totally giving it to hillary, every way they can. they want hillary to win. >> robert, let me -- sly, if i could add to that. you mentioned this early about the super delegates of process not being fair. for the bernie sanders' supporters out there who feel that way, what do you think the democratic party should do? change the rules next time about? what should they do about the super delegates and this process? >> i think both parties need to reform their process to make it more transparent and predictable. i don't think -- i think -- bernie sanders has done well in caucuses but the caucuses should be eliminated as well. both sides need to have a predictable easy way for people to understand the process. both sides should have open primaries where they attract independents. if these parties are to survive,
they better reform themselves. >> why do you say that, if they are to survive? >> right now they look like they're insular, conniving corporate machines that have little to regard for the people that vote in their primaries. it almost appear as if their ear using the voters as props. >> what do you think is behind -- what could happen, i guess, with the sentiments that you're seeing behind bernie sanders supporters, behind donald trump, this anti-establishment movement that's happening. where do you think it goes after campaign 2016? >> well that depends on who wins. that depends on who wins and how they react. it's not going away. it's not a fad. and a lot of people are counting on it to go away. you know why it's not going to go away? because they haven't solved the problem of wages and inequality in the country. and until they do people are
going to be restless. they think they can make it go away, come up with some sweetheart deal and bring in a wall street candidate like paul ryan and have him run against hillary clinton and go back to the status quo but that's not going to put feed on people's tables, that's not going to stop the jobs from going oversees. >> hear's a tweet from a viewer, tweeting, he doesn't think hillary will be a good president but he will vote for her. there you go, more common sense. >> look. we're given terrible choices sometimes. but sometimes we have to make decisions so we don't make them worse. you have to be somewhat pragmatic. i don't think i'm -- i don't think i'm being -- i don't think i'm being overly idealistic with my positions today but i also am
living in the real world. >> clarkston, michigan. jamie is watching there. a democrat. how will you vote today, jamie? in michigan. i'm sorry. >> caller: we've already voted in michigan and i was sorry that hillary didn't pull it off. but it was close. wisconsin, they have their chance today and we'll see where they stand. i'm very strong about hillary clinton. and i will support her all of the way. and by the way, i'm from mississippi. and i left mississippi when i was 18 years old. i wouldn't live in mississippi, i wouldn't go back to mississippi. my husband maz been retired since '92. so hillary, why her and bill didn't go back to mississippi is probably the reason i left. that's a whole different country down there and they don't think
like i do. i'm not a racist. and i hated it. i was there during the civil rights when it was happening. and i saw martin luther king shot. and it wasn't a pretty sight. and i know what hillary did after that, she was too young during that time, but i seen her work her heart out for the poor and for the underprivileged. she's worked hard all her life for the underprivileged. >> let's have sly respond to that. >> sometimes she does and sometimes she doesn't. i think she's quite -- i think she's quite the complicated person. she certainly working for the poor when she sat on the board of walmart. she wasn't working for the poor when she ended up voting for some consumer bills that stripped the rights away from
american citizens. she wasn't work, looking out for the poor when she supported her husband's policies on trade. she wasn't looking for the american worker when, as secretary of state, she said in india that there are good and bad things about trade deals, refusing to condemn outsourcing. she said that on foreign soil. she's unpredictable. she's done thing for women and children and the safety net. i'm not going to paint this as black and white. but too often when money is involved sean she has to make a choice between people and money, she's go with the money. >> john in new jersey. independent. hi there, john. >> caller: thank you for c-span. the slogan for this season is "it's the money, stupid." bern my sanders campaign is a courageous effort of come pain finance reform in action. going to regular americans.
her hands are tied just like president obama tied his hands taking wall street money. so no prosecutions of wall street and financial wrongdoers. the don frank bill is just smoke and mirrors at 3,000 pages. bernie sanders wants glass'g chl is so simple that even a first year law student could bring about a prosecution on that. if this problem is not solved, this money problem not solved all other bets are off. we'll have a financial collapse. >> let me add to that, the "washington times" reporting that bernie sanders with individual donors is outpacing hillary clinton, raised $44 million in march, mrs. clinton raised $29.5 million. what's your response after that call? >> it's remarkable that someone
would run for president at 71 from vermont with thick messy h hair. i know my sister who has never been involved in politics, at least for a very long time is so excited, she's writ rn bernie checks. she doesn't have much money. it's inspirational. and people can see through the slogans and the slick campaigns. there is something authentic and there is something going on. it is a very unique year. and you know, there's a whole movement building in wisconsin, the wisconsin working families party is building a whole grass roots movement in wisconsin and it looks like they're going to get a young man named chris lar can elected here in milwaukee today. he's been outspent 26 to 1 in the race for county executive and yet it's still neck in neck.
>> since bernie sanders has inspired so many, should he mount a third party bid if he doesn't get the nomination? >> no. and he said he won't run a third party race. that's never been his goal. i think his role was to reshape the discussion and if he got the nomination, great. if not, she's inspired a lot of people to get involved in the process. i don't think many people thought that bernie sanders' campaign would catch this level of fire. when he announced in the spring on lake champlain in burlington, i was optimistic that he would make a difference but had no idea it would go this far. >> in ou viewers want to learn more go to slyoffice.com. thank you for your time this morning. >> thanks for having me 0 on. campaign 2016 continues today with the wisconsin primary. live coverage begins at 9:00
eastern. tune in for complete election results, candidate speeches and viewer reaction. taking you on the road to the white house on c-span, c-span radio and c-span.org. a c-span tweet from moments ago, president obama in the white house briefing room right now he's briefing reporters on the state of the economy and the treasury department's new inversion rules dealing with large corporations moving portions of their operations overseas to avoid paying u.s. taxes. c-span carrying the president's briefing live right now. we'll take a quick look at senator collins and merrick garland. he's making the rounds on capitol hill today and this photo op with judge garland taking place actually after the hour-long meeting that happened
up on capitol hill. susan collins, one of the few republican senators breaking ranks, meeting with judge merrick as the republican leaders continue their refusal to conduct hearings to consider this nominee during the presidential lame duck session. ashton carter will discuss this afternoon ertz to modernize his department. he'll be speaking at the center or strategic and international studies. you'll be able to watch that live at 1:00 eastern on c-span. sna so sign director james green on the future of the agency's space exploration program. nasa plans to send human to mars by the year 2030. director green spoke to the smithsonian associates ghiend the science program. this is about 90 minutes. [ applause ] thank you all for coming.
we got the e-mail about 10:30 this morning that said that charlie wasn't coming. and that was the bad news. because we didn't have a replacement then. but when i found out who was coming, i was actually kind of delighted because charlie be lan is a great guy, i like talking to him but he' and administrator. and administrators by their nature are cautious. he knows the science but not like jim green. jim green lives and breathes the science. we wait until he speaks so we can get a sound bite for our radio program because he's the one who says something interesting every time. it's really a delight to have you with us. thanks for coming. what a pleasure. so. >> we're going to talk about planets and planet science. it's going to be cool. we should start, just judging by everybody's reaction, how many people here have seen "the
martian"? >> great. >> i'll give you the briefest of outlines. there's a guy who gets stuck on mars and he has to live because his crew mates take off, they think he's dead but he's not. and i don't know, can i spoil the movie? >> i think you could. >> what happens to him is quite interesting. but what make this movie so remarkable is they really engaged people like jim green who got the science right, except for one thing. and jim why don't you tell them what the one thing is that they got wrong. >> there are a few. but the one glaring problem of course is the dust storm. the movie opens, huge dust storm. so mark watney and his team aredy employing science experiments. he's picking up samples on mars, the thing that we're going to be
starting to do with the mars 2020 mission. as they're doing that, back in the hab, the weather report on mars is updated and a huge dust storm is coming in. what's great about that is we can actually do that weather report right now. we have global circulation models of mars of the temperature and pressure distribution over the entire planet that based on the day that we're getting from the orbiters, we can do that in near real time. even that's quite accurate. but what's not accurate, of course, is the dust storm is worse than anything you saw on lawrence of arabia. but the pressure is so low, about a percent of our own atmospheric pressure here on earth. and even though the winds can go 125 miles an hour, can be really brisk, it's not enough to straighten an american flag
sitting on its surface. story. sorry that's -- you know, you may not have realized that. so it's very benign in that sense. but what it can be is crippling from an atmospheric perspective. the dust gets lofted very high, can go as high as 25 to 30 kilometers, very high, you know. so at noon it may look like midnight. i mean it can get very dark. one other thing that we found that i did mention to ridley and his team that wasn't in the book nor had they planned to put it in the movie. was that recently we've been observing that these really high dust storms where the dust can discharge and it can be lightened. so we've seen after the dust storm goes away, the lightning strikes on the ground. they're dark, spidery looking things, really neat looking unless you're down there at the
tomb. and also we now are seeing from orbit with our imageers, we catch a little brightness going on as we sweep the camera by and then sweep it again. we saw an area that was bright because it had lightning strike at the time. and then as we go, the next image it's not there. so we know it's occurring. we don't know the distribution, we don't know how strong it is. we know virtually nothing about it. but wit's one of those, one of those new things that actually got into the movie a little bit. >> but i was wondering, we were speculating about this. so if a dust storm wasn't enough to cause them to abort the mission and that's why they take -- everybody else takes off and he gets stuck there, we were trying to think of whether there was anything else that might be severe enough -- are there mars quakes? >> really good question. we know mars is shaky. we do know that.
and how we know that is we have an imageer, called mars reconnaissance orbiter that could actually see this table from orbit if it was sitting on mars. really high resolution imageer. fabulous instrument. and we've caught avalanches was they were occurring. >> wow. >> we don't know how active mars is, who those avalanches are because it's still a very active planet, like the earth is, with the mars quakes or it's from meteoric impact. we get impacted all of the time. we get ten tons of meteoric material coming into the earth every day. mars, we don't know exactly how much but the atmosphere is so thin that a lot of it will make it to the surface. whereas most of what we receive burns it coming in. so we don't know where this source is. now we're going to know a lot more about that when we launch
the mission called insight and that was designed to do a couple of things. one was deployed a seismometer that's the most sensitive seismometer we've built on this earth. it's more sensitive than anything we've deployed. and it's so sensitive it's going to not only be able to feel mars and whether it can quake on its own but the impacts and it will observe those reflections of sound wave that travel through the rock and we'll understand the core size, perhaps whether it's molten or not, the mantle size and the size of the crust. and it will be only other planet besides earth as a terrestrial site that we'll understand that well. from a human exploration perspecti perspective, it's going to be important to know, you know, how active mars is for humans
walking around oond the surface. some of the places they might want to go for protection are collapsed lava tubes. we' we've found a number of them from orbit. >> what's a lava tube? >> like here on earth we have volcanos that spew molten rock out and that material then works its way through the earth, comes out, gets evacuated and then you can get a vacated tube of material. we've found those on mars. mars has a huge -- several huge volcan volcanos. one of which is so large that if it was on earth it would take up the state of missouri. just, you know, the whole state. i mean it's a huge shield
volcano, and then there's the thar sus ridge. and those are hefty. in around that area we find the lava tubes. how we see that, we take the data from a variety of our spacecraft and put it on the web and many kids, high school students and college students look at the data. and the first lava tube was found by a high school student. and it was really great. it was a collapsed roof and the material formed a little ramp. the lighting was perfect. and if i was there and i had a rover, i would drive right down in it. that might be an area where humans would be easily safe from a lot of the problems that exist on mars that we don't have here on earth, in terms of its radiation. >> i want to ask about that. but what about active volcanos? is that not --
>> yeah. we haven't found any. you know, we're on the look forward. we have imaged mars at a certain resolution. not high resolution. so as i mentioned, even though we could see the table from orbit and the mars reconnaissance orbiter with that instrument called high-rise has been operating for ten years, we've only observed about 3% of the surface at that high resolution. okay? so there's a lot of mars we haven't seen at really high resolution. and the tremendous discovery that that instrument made just this last year were on these crater walls. we find during the summer streaks of material down these crater walls. we've known that now for many years, several years. they come and go. they all happen during the
summer when the face of the crater and the sun, you know, gets the maximum energy from the sun during that time period, then we see these streaks. we then, fortunately as we began to see more and more and more of them -- we could only see them with the high resolution imageer because they're about the length of this room in terms of width. but the length is a couple football fields long. all right? they're really long. and we call them reoccurring slope lynn yay. that's a scientific term meaning the long lines you couldn't see unless you had the high resolution imageer. once we started seeing them, we started looking for them. now we're finding them all over the place. the best result that came from that occurred last year when we actually got one big enough that our minute rolling instrument could take a good look at it and say, what is that material.
why is it, why is it dark like it is. why does it form these streaks. turns out it's water. and that means liquid water is flowing on mars. these craters are literally weeping during the summer. so there are two basic theories that come out. first theory is from curiosity we're measuring all kinds of humidity. in fact mark watney could have actually gotten water resources a lot easier than blowing himself up as we did. [ laughter ] but you can extract the water out of the atmosphere because there's actually a fair amount of humidity in the atmosphere. we know that but curiosity can tell us that. that's part of the cycle. so one of the ideas is that well the only way you can have liquid water on the surface at these times during the year, even though the temperature is high,
the pressure is really low. you shouldn't have liquid water on the surface unless it's briny water. in the slopes of the craters are a lot of briny material. the concept is maybe that material is pulling it out of the air. and that was an okay theory for a while until we found more and more and more and then you do the calculations. it's all about the math. the movie got that right -- and you found out there's far more of these than there is total humidity in the atmosphere, so you need to add water somewhere. and so now the prevailing theory, the second theory that's come out is probably the one that's right, and that is, they're coming from underground aq aqua furs. so mars has a water resource underneath its surface, believe.
so what's happening is there's an ice plug in the aqua fur. and as the sun heats that, goes from ice too vapor and eventually breaks through and the water pours down the side of the crater, a lot of it. so this is really exciting because we had always thought that the water table, as you got closer to the e kwart was much deeper. and it may be as low as 15 kilometers below the surface. and now it looks like it's within a few meters of the surface at longitudes -- sorry, latitudes like washington, d.c. in the 40s and above, right at the surface, a nice little water layer. as you get closer to the equator it might be tens of meters but not 15 kilometers. so mark watney could have gone to what we would probably do,
would be a well. we would have a well. and the challenge with the well is you might have liquid water down there but as you hull it out, it's going to get colder and colder. how can you keep it liquid. that's engineering, right? what mark watney didn't know is there's a crater closer to him than path finder is where it is weeping during the summer and that's a new discovery. when i talkedo andy wear -- i didn't know andy when he published the book. >> he's the author. >> the original author of the book. andy started it in 2007, 2008, maybe 2009. and he's a computer programmer that loves to write. had an environment at home where he loves science fiction. so he would try a few things,
wrote a book, got published, don't do too well. in this business if you don't make the home run with the first book you don't really get up to bat again. he started writing this as a serial, put out the first chapter and had 3,000 people initially looking at his website. they would read it, comment on it and go, okay, this is kind of cool, going well. and he put out another one, another one, another one. at the end of that process, after about 32 chapters, he had the book, all right there. but he had people who wanted to read it on their kindle and they didn't know how to download a pdf, it was different chapters. what you do about it. andy contacted amazon, read the material that he needed to take the chapters in pdf form, a typical file formatt and create
a book in the kindle form that you then could read and then you put it on amazon. the problem is you had to sell it. couldn't give it away. he wanted to give it away. so they forced him to sell it for 99 cents and am gone got 70 and he got 29 cents. that was okay. but all of these people could download it. well it just wildfire, word of mouth, put anytime the top ten science fiction e books and then that's when i was noticed by a publisher and they contacted andy and then they said i think you need an agent, let me be your agent. we'll get you a book deal. you know, we'll go from electronic to hard copy. that sounds backwards doesn't it? that's how it went, audio book and then translated into chinese or whatever languages they had in mind. he said okay. sure. the next week fox called it because they noticed it and
wanted to buy the rights, the movie rights to the book. with that, you know, everything else happened rapidly and now andy is no longer a computer programmer. [ laughter ] >> a great story. so that was -- actually that was my disaster scenario, is that they park the lander at the base of a hill where there's one of these plugs and they can tell that it's warming up and it could blow any second. because i have been to -- what's the name of that volcano in scotland -- i mean in ice land that nobody can pronounce the name of? >> yeah, i still can't say it. >> and when it blows the lid off, not just lava but water comes flowing down washing out bridges. because -- i'm going to help andy on this next book.
because it's so acidic or salty, it could be caustic and come down and wreak havoc with the hav. that's why they have to get out of there. >> we don't know enough about mars at that level to say that's not -- that that would be ruled out. >> yeah. yeah. that's good. >> yeah. >> you might be able to make it after all. >> right. >> you said something a few minutes ago that i want to pursue about these high school students who are looking at pictures of mars. now, happily my children are no longer in high school so they won't be doing this but i'm still curious, how you connect the student with the picture and the knowledge to know that might be a lava tube.
this data that nasa puts out there. somebody is telling somebody how to look at it. >> we have in this country and many other countries too, highly motivated kids where their knowledge for science is almost insatiable. we work very hard to put a variety of material out on the web for them to get access to. we have some really fabulous websites where they can actually look at the latest images. steve squiers who is the project scientist, our top scientist for the opportunity rover, the one that has been now on mars roaming around for more than 11 years, loves to come -- he loves to tell this story. loves to come in first thing in the morning and see what the kids have done. he almost says it that way. because what they will do, when that data comes down, there will be an image here and image there, different images here and
different resolutions, and these kids will create those and create a mosaic and stitch it together and they know the attitudes and the resolutions and how to match them well, because the descriptions are there. and they have the tools to do that now. very easily. so when he comes in, it's just like, you know, he's got it on huge screens, it's mu vu theater and he just walks on to mars. that's when they start, let's nervous gait more of this area and get higher resolution of that. you know, that's just now part of what they do. and we put it on the web as fast as we can. >> i actually have talked to a high school student, just barely a high school student who's in the running to pick the next landing site for mars 2020. do you know this kid? >> i do. alex longo. >> that's right.
15 i think he is now. >> when he started he was 14. >> he's going to age out of this pretty soon. he's amazing. >> he is. >> he's got a very thorough explanation of why we should go back to the land site of -- was it opportunity in. >> spirit. >> yeah, spirit. >> goo receive crater. >> it's just may maamazing. >> here's what we do. our mars 2020, we have a set of objectives. we want to go to a geologically diverse but ancient region on mars that hasn't changed in three and a half billion years. that's an area where curiosity is right now. the kind of area we want to go to. and that's when mars actually was much more like earth. it had a deep ocean, two-thirds of the hemisphere was under
water, had rains, clouds, ice, snow, the works. okay? here on earth when you have that kind of water, there could be life. and so we're looking at regions that haven't changed in three and a half billion years that can could go to on mars to see perhaps how life started on mars. life started on earth about that same time but we can't find those rocks anymore. we've buried all of those with our plate tet tonics and the buy yos severe. that's typically our science people can you can apply as anyone can to the digests and look at what comes out as our calls and alex did. we asked for the science community to say here are the requirements. find us a place on mars that satisfies those. come and be prepared to argue
your case. and so for us to see how that goes, you put in a couple page abstract, what your arguments were and that location. and alex did. and the organizing committee was looking at the looking at the abstracts and et cetera, et cetera, and his was fabulous. just as good as any one of the other scientists. it was really great. and so we did that because we wanted to see how many scientists were picking similar locations. and if they did, we'd group them. we'd say, okay, here's your team. so alex ended up as a member of a science team. and they were so impressed with him, he presented to the entire science group the case for gusef crater when we had our meeting. he's doing great.
he can have my job later. >> there was also another meeting. there was a human landing site -- >> that's mine. >> so why are we looking at human landing sites? very speculative, i would say. >> yeah. so why are we doing that? so when we go to mars we're going to need high resolution imaging because we're going to need to land in a region that's safe. and when humans goes to mars, there are going to be places they're going to set up and there's going to be some resources they're going to want. they're going to want to know where the water is, they're going to want to know how to extract oxygen out of the atmosphere. they're going to want to know where the methane vents are because they'll want to tap that and heat their habs. they'll want access to certain minerals they can grind up and use in their 3d printer to fix anything that they want to. okay. that's what they're going to want. and what we want as scientists
is some exciting science locations all around them. for them to be able to go, make samples, be able to core rock. look at the history of mars like here on earth the geological strata that's pages in the history book of how the earth evolved. we want to do that on mars. when are we going to do it? if humans are going to go in the 2030s and 2040s, won't we have a lot of time? and the answer to that is no. the reason why is i have a high resolution imager that can do the job that's been up there ten years, it's only going to last another six years. and if we don't pick those sites, and if we don't get the high resolution imaging and the high resolution mineralology, we're going to be 15, 20 years behind the times. so now is the time. so we worked with human exploration to come up with
defining the region. the region of interest is called an exploration zone. it's about 100 kilometers in diameter. the habs will look like what they looked like on "the martian." the rovers will look like what they did in "the martian." because they're modeled after our mock-ups already. we have a road runner that runs around and looks a little bit like what they put together. and so they're going to land in one spot in this 100-kilometer area. they're going to have habs in another and they're going to do science in other areas. and we listed the requirements, sent thatut to the community. and we got a tremendous response. we got well over 50 sites which alex supported a team just like we did with 2020. we met and it was tremendously stimulating. we recognize that there's a huge disparity of knowledge between what the scientists know and
what the engineers think they know about mars. okay. for which we need to get them up to where we are. >> so i always figure the engineers know best, but -- >> the engineers will design things. >> yeah. >> so right now they didn't realize there was methane on mars and they could actually heat a hab. >> they could use -- >> they could use methane, it's a resource. >> okay. >> so give you an example. when i started this whole approach with working with human exploration, it was about three years ago. i got invited to go to johnson and talk about mars to the astronaut corps. so they said you got a half hour, talk, come on in, tell us a few things about mars. oh, by the way, we've been working on it and here's all the things that we've been doing. you're on youtube, you can log on and see stan love talk about mars and he gives all these
great talks. and he does. here's what we're doing on station, and the ultimate objective is we're going to mars. and it's always the end slide and it's always a hubble picture. i'm going, what? it's like me saying i had a great vacation on earth this summer. where? mars is that diverse. it is that diverse. and so in talking to stan it was, oh, just put us down anywhere. and i'm going, no, no, it's not going to work like that. you're going there to do sites. yeah, yeah. then you're going to listen to us to where we need to go. and you're going to need to live off the land. you're going to need some resources. he says, well, we'll just take everything out of the air. we just need oxygen, we'll pull it out of the air. i said, no, you're throwing away some of the best parts of mars. why would you do that? why would you do that? and in fact another instrument on insite, we're going to jam a
thin little metal strip down into the ground several meters and is full of temperature sensors. and we're going to see how hot mars is, how much heat actually comes through the surface. and if there's a lot, you then can light geothermal, you do mars thermal, okay? there's all kinds of resources, all kinds of things we can do if we work together. >> blasphemy. >> no, no, it happens. everyone's working hard. everyone's working hard. it's now time to get together. even though it sounds like we're doing it way too early, we're not. we're right on track. >> someone described -- i heard someone in the government who i won't identify described, she said, don't think of them as silos, think of them as cylinders of excellence.
[ laughter ] i guess that's one way to look at it. i was just trying to remember, let's go through how many active spacecraft and rovers are there at mars right now? >> okay. so we have two rovers. >> two rovers. that would be opportunity and curiosity. >> correct. isa has one orbiter. >> european station agency. >> right. that's called mars express. and we have some fabulous instruments on it. fabulous spacecraft. we helped the indian research science organization, isro, i-s-r-o, to get their orbiter into orbit. >> that's there. >> it's there, it's working. and we have -- nasa has odyssey, mars reconnaissance and
m.a.v.e.n. so there's five. >> five. >> and then in march esa's launching the trace gas orbiter. >> right. >> that's going to look in the atmosphere for trace gases like meth ane. they're going to map the methane -- >> m.a.v.e.n. was also going to look at methane. >> m.a.v.e.n. never promised to look at methane. it's not in its suite of instruments. >> i see. >> so trace gas orbiter will be great. we know methane is there because we have observed it from telescopes here on earth. that was the first time -- that was a very controversial set of measurements. the reason why is we got all kinds of methane in our atmosphere, so we're looking through methane to see methane on another planet. and that's very far away. and so the only way you can do it is the fact that the planet
moves, gives you a slightly little shift in its signal. it's called a doppler shift that enables us to separate the earth methane from mars methane. it's a very tricky measurement. and the experts at goddard space flight center really pulled it off, really mapped mars globally. and that was tremendously controversial. until curiosity landed, and curiosity at first looked for me methane, but it was also outgassing. so it carried all the gases from earth with it. so it took a while for it to outgas. but now it's soerveing methane on its own. and the methane is coming in erps, and that's also very surprising. so what we saw from earth were vents of methane that occur in a seasonal way. mostly during the summer, it turns out. okay. and then curiosity is observing
that doesn't quite track with the season. so it's almost like perhaps in the underground aquifers there's something going on generating methane for which that's then seeping through the soils. it's right under where curiosity is sitting. >> is there any chance of traffic jams in orbit? >> no. >> okay. crowded there -- >> no, we have more problems here on earth than we do at mars. >> okay. i have to get you to cop to one other thing. so when we were planning this event, one of the factors we were considering about when charles bolden was going to come is when insite was going to launch. >> yes. >> and you know there's only -- you can only launch to mars every two years. you could do it more often if you had a more powerful rocket, but it would take a lot more powerful rocket. so every two years they're lined up in just the perfect orientation that you need the least amount of energy to get there. and that's good because you can spend more of