tv Capitol Hill Hearings CSPAN September 6, 2011 8:00pm-1:00am EDT
those at 7:00 eastern at a joint session of congress. after its done, we will take your phone calls and comments. in a few moments, mitt romney creates his plan to create jobs. house democrats offer their jobs plan. after that, a look ahead to the 10th anniversary to the 9/11 attacks with janet napolitano and chairman of the house intelligence committee, representative mike watch more video of the candidates, and track the latest, -- campaign contributions with c-span's website. it helps you navigate the political landscape. plus, links to c-span media
partners, all at c- span.org/campaign2012. mitt romney said if he was elected his plan to create jobs would include reducing corporate taxes and reducing the federal budget by $20 billion. [applause] >> thank you for being here this morning. many of you may have heard news today of a tragedy in carson city. this morning, a lone gunman opened fire in a restaurant, wounding and killing a number of
nevadans. we just learned wetwo of them -- we learned that two of them were active national guard members. our thoughts and prayers are with the victims, their families, and friends. i ask that we take a moment. if you would join me in a moment of remembrance for those members and their families. thank you. well, welcome, and thanks for coming today. it is heartening to see such a great crowd turned out and what a great honor it is that governor mitt romney back in the nevada.
it is fitting that governor romney has chosen nevada to discuss his jobs plan, a state that has been hurt like no other from policies that stifle entrepreneurship, investment, and job creation. it is exciting that the governor is here today to provide his vision for a more prosperous america. [applause] today we visit a facility created because john mccandless believed in himself and believed in his country. he drove to nevada with a willingness to bet on himself. he worked hard, earning and saving enough money to take a chance. today that chance employs more than 100 people. like any good business owner --
[applause] john and his sons have had to make difficult decisions. recently, at 82 years old, john decided to continue working every day, reducing his own paycheck so that others could keep their jobs, and he had to comply with new and often unnecessary federal regulations. as government has become a larger and larger part of every business owners life. it is an honor to be here at a facility built for hard work, dedication, determination, and pride, and is an honor to educe to you the founder of mccandless international trucks, john mccandless. [applause] >> [inaudible]
a child of the depression, i have worked since i was 7 years old call. i lived in long island. i dug worms and sold them to fisherman at 2 cents apiece. i used to pick up bottles, beer bottles, usually. people would throw them out the windows of their cars, and i would get a nickel apiece, and a nickel would build -- would buy you a double-dipped ice cream cone. i worked in a service station. i was made manager at the age of 13. it was hard for the owner of the fine anybody better than i
because of world war ii. i got married in california. i picked peaches. i worked on a harvester. then i went to a junior college there -- before that i joined the navy, and that enabled me to go to college. [applause] in the navy i was an aviation electronics technician. i spent two years in the navy. i got out of the navy, went to college on the gi bill, played football, had a football scholarship, and then all of a sudden i graduated and i thought, what am i going to do? i did it. i went to work for shell oil co. because they tried to make a clerical worker out of me, and i did not stand for that.
if you saw my desk, you would know why. anyhow i told the shell oil people i did not like their job, and they said, work for six more weeks in the morning and find the afternoon to find a job. the next afternoon i found a job with international harvester co., and i went through the ranks there, trainee, manager, branch manager in phoenix. then from phoenix i came to las vegas, with a u-haul trailer and a formula driver traveled. i found a warehouse, made that my dealership for your walleyed build the new one. international would be the money to become a dealer.
so it was at that location, i think for 20 years, and then we moved here in 1994, added 8 to, i still good work every day, and my wife has convinced me i do not have to come in on saturdays anymore. she wants me to retire, and i keep telling her that it is twice as much husband and half the income. despite the rough economy, i have not had any massive layoffs here. i have laid off four people, and it was not a lay off. they were not doing the job. my service manager found jobs for the four people, so i did not feel guilty about that. i still believe in the american worker. i got through to jimmy carter e ra and was so happy when ronald
reagan made me an america feel good again. the troubles i have now are epa regulations, congress, and the nlrb. i do not trust the insider politicians in washington. they have no idea on how things work, and have no real work experience. i am honored to introduce you to a man who has real experience making things work and has a real plan to get america working again. ladies and gentlemen, the next president of the united states, mitt romney. [applause] >> thank you. nicely done. quite a story. thank you. thank you. thank you. thank you.
thank you, john. that is an american success story. i appreciate the chance of being in this extraordinary facility, where a lot of hard work occurs. it is in bill bullion, -- it is ennobling. as people work hard we can afford a strong economy whose military can defend us. we love and care for those people in the service, and thank you to the congressman for welcoming us here in his district. we appreciate his election and appreciate looking forward to many more. this is gone to be a conversation today. i do not have a text written. you can see what i have got. i have some notes of some things i want to tell you.
i will not be reading. i use a teleprompter from time to time. ournt to talk of about economy and what is going to take to get america back to work again. over the next couple months, and over the next couple decades. i want to describe to you division i have of what -- of some i want to describe to you the vision i have what america should be over the next couple decades. let us say our people should be the best people -- best-paid people in the world. number 2, it should be good to be in the middle class in america. you should not have to wonder -- [applause] how you are going to meet your bills or for college for your
kids or take restrictions you have been prescribed. america should be a job machine. jobs are being created all the time, people looking for employees to join their enterprises, the people coming out of colleges and vocational schools able to get jobs right away, even people in high school knowing there are jobs waiting for them. we should see the world buying the things we make. we should be proud of the fact they buy as much from us as we buy from them. [applause] i see america been on the leading edge of innovation. time and again, when there is a new invention, a new economy, a new era, innovation and being the innovation leader of the world is the best leading indicator of what the future will be. with those elements of our
vision in place, we know one thing -- we will never questioned whether the future will be brighter than the past. we will know we are leaving to our kids a legacy of prosperity and liberty as america will remain as it has always been -- an example to the wrong, a shining city on the hill, and i hope of the earth. that is the vision. [applause] now, to john, and a few of the older folks in the audience, that sounds a bit like things were in the 1950's, 1960's, and the 1970's, and you might say can we go back to the way things were back then? a lot has changed in our economy globally over the last few decades. i hope we recognize just how much has changed and the fact that so much has changed says the right course ahead is to it here to the principles that made us a powerful nation we are
economically, but also to update our strategy, our economic policies in such a way we can conform to the new realities of the new global economy. you know some of these changes. 30 years ago china are represented a 1% of the economic conditions of the world. now they are 10 times as that amount. 30 years ago, america was overwhelmingly the largest manufacturing nation in the world. this year, china is slated to passed us as the largest manufacturing nation in the world. about 30 years ago, as the nobel prize awards, americans or people affiliated with american institutions, won 3/4 of the nobel prizes. today it is less than half of that amount. 20 years ago, you want to make a phone call to the airport, you
took out a quarter and went into a pay phone and you put it in the pay phone. today he got these things, all right? you have a smart phone. a pay phone, you put your quarter in, a lot of time you had an operator come on, telling you to put in more quarters, and you're connected to another person and you spoke voice to voice. if you connected to a machine, like a fax machine caught you remember that screech? [inaudible] this is an entirely different economy than the one we knew in the 1950's and the 1960's. our economic strategy has to be brought up to date and to make sure we are able to provide the vision that i described. the right course for america is to believe in growth. growing our economy is the way
to get people to work. the right answer for america is not to grow governments or to believe that government can create jobs. it is instead to create the conditions that allow the private sector and on to for norris to create jobs and to grow our economy. growth is the answer, not government. [applause] over the last several months, my team and i spent a lot of time talking about what things we think we ought to do the update america's economic strategy for this century. we put together a plan which i will describe in a moment, and we have gone with an analysis to look and see what the impacts of this plan would be on the american people. let's put this in context. in the first four years, if i'm lucky enough to be president, this will grow the economy at approximately 4% per year for
each of those four years read it will las. it will add 11.5 million jobs in america. let's talk about how much the economy has changed globally and how we need to change our policies to take advantage of the changes. back in the 1950's, 1960's, every business in the world wanted to be located here. this was the place business was done. this was the largest market in the world. nothing else compared with the markets in the united states. government could charge this is what ever they wanted to in taxes because where else with the businesses go? this is where their capital was. their blast furnaces, their assembly lines, there transfer lines all here in the united states. today, there are markets outside the united states that are
growing very fast. america is not the only market in the war. -- in the world. we now compete for enterprises. it is no longer what a wise decision for us to have the highest tax rate for employers in the world. our taxes are higher than any other nation besides pitchman -- besides japan. the average is 25% in other nations. ours is 35%. we need to bring that level down and i will do that in day one. this was from the mindset of the past. what we sat in the past was if you are an american company and you make money over in some far country, and you have a bunch of money you made there, if you want to keep the money there and
invest in that country, we will let you do it tax free. he did not pay in the u.s. taxes. if you want to bring money home and invest here, then we are want to tax you at our 35% rate. this does not making sense, does it? we have to end this repatriation tax and get money to come back to america to create jobs here and invest in america. [applause] we also have to help the american people, not just employers, but the american people if we're on the help grow this economy. if i were to ask you who are the people in this country that have been hurt most by the obama economy, i guess is you would see the middle class. i would start right there. that is why as i look at changes that our tax policies, the place i want to make a difference is for the middle- class. one way of life to do that is
help people in the middle class be able to save their money. how do you do that? i will eliminate any tax on your savings if you are the middle- class. the tax on interest, dividends, or capital gains. -- no tax on interest, dividends, or capital gains. in the past, you could put all sorts of regulatory burdens and burdens and bureaucratic burdens on american business, and where else are they going to go? so they just swallowed it and stayed right here. today they can go the other places. it is still important that regulations tr. we have got to stop this extraordinary we have placed on small businesses, particularly, and middle-sized businesses, because they will not be able
start or they will move elsewhere. do you know how much the burden is to be you know how much we pay taxes each year as a people? if you take all the people in america and all the companies in america and add up their income tax, the government collects $1.10 trillion a year. the government does a calculation of what the cost is of regulations per year. do not forget the total tax burden is $1.10 trillion. do you know what the burden is put $1.70 trillion a year. this is not just some side issue. it is burdens on enterprises from growing and expanding and starting in america, and if i'm in the white house the first thing i will do is say all those regulations that were put in place by president obama? by the way, his rate of adding regulations is four times greater than president bush's
was. all those regulations he put in place, i'm going to stop and those tracks and say any of those -- [applause] any of those regulations that cost american jobs we are going to get rid of. we're going to say to every department government, if you have a new regulation you are going to enact, yet to remove one of equal scale. we're going to make sure congress gets in on the act. what i need is some regulator wants to put some grandees scheme in place, i want congress to be able to vote it up or down. i want people to have a word to say other regulations that are placed on american employers. [applause] in past, our market was king.
everybody wanted be here. this is that i knew was -- were thinking about international markets as gravy, icing on the cake. this is where the real stuff happened. today, some of the fastest growing economies in the world are outside the united states. do you realize that the world, the global middle-class, is going to more than double over the next 10 years? markets for our goods and services are expanding extraordinarily. we have to rethink trade. there is also a reality associated with a nation that is a high productivity nation. we use that term and a lot. what does that mean? americans are the most productive workforce in the world. productivity means output per person. how much stuff each person does on average in america. we are the highest in the world.
people in this country can do more and more stuff per person, the question is going to be, why are we going to need so many more people? how are we going to find so many jobs as the ones we have are making more and more stuff per person? we're finding more jobs for our people if we can sell our jobs -- our goods to other nations. it is good to have trade. as long as the people we have trade with played by the rules. over the last 2.5 years, the european nations and china have been putting in place trade agreements with other nations. we have been sitting as if nothing is going on in the world. no trade agreements negotiated, signed. that puts us behind. as nations that established as linkages with other nations distribution, consumers in those markets get used to the brand names, and when we come in 10 years later, there is no market for us. i will dramatically increase the
interest and the effort in our nation to establish trade relations with other nations. i will establish some but i would call the reagan economic son. i will say to those nations around world that want to trade on a fair and free basis, we will honor our intellectual property, our patents, card designs, are no all, if they will honor those things and flowed their currency and not she, they can come in this reagan economic zone , and will trade in more places and american goods will be seen around the world. one more thing i will do, and that is i will clamp down on the cheaters, and china is the worst example of that. [applause] they have manipulated their currency to make their products artificially inexpensive -- [inaudible]
i will go after them for stealing our intellectual property, and they were allies if they cheap there is a price to pay. we cannot have a trade war or a trade surrender either. we have to make sure we have fair trade with nations that are willing to live by the rules, and we will insist on that with all of our friends. [applause] you recognize in the energy world, do you know we are an energy-rich nation? we're living like an energy-poor nation. we have established in washington barriers by politicians who think they know better than the american people and american markets that establish barriers that make it harder to use coal, to get natural gas, it possible to establish a nuclear power generation facility. i believed in wind and solar, except where all the green jobs?
a lot of them cost more -- other jobs. i want to take down those barriers and get energy companies back to work, including the energy we need at a price we can afford, and i will do that. [applause] let me mention one more thing. i got a long list here, so i will not go through all of them. if you want to convince businesses -- what is a business? it is john. here are going to convince people like john to take my life savings and good to my family and friends and say, would you loan me some of your money and i will start a business? maybe it is the companies that want to build a factory somewhere, and they are deciding whether to build it in a nation in latin america or in the u.s. or somewhere else. if you want people to convince people to invest in america, they need confidence that
america's currency and america's government are stable and they're not want to find ourselves in a greece-like trash. it is essential to get that economy going long term to stop this incessant practice of spending massively more money than you can. you have to ultimately balance your budget. [applause] so my economic plan lays out how i will ultimately get government to shrinking, grow our economy, balance our budget so that investors in new jobs, enterprises, will have confidence in america. now, this is a pretty complete volume of the work we have had over the last several months. it is about 150 pages with 59 different policy ideas. there are a lot more where these came from.
we have one of these for each of you. if he did not happen to get one of these in your hand, good to amazon, kindle, i do not know if it is free. you can get one of these and look at it. it is in color on kindle. you can look at the civic 59 steps i will take. this is an effort to update our economic strategy for this century and the next century. this is recognition that the old ways have principles that will work forever, that growth is the foundation of an economic prosperity, but our tactics and strategy need to be updated from time to time. i am asked now and then, why is not obama working? why is the obama and economy to tepid?
how has it failed so badly to put americans to work? he is giving a speech in a couple of days. they are not working. the reason is -- [applause] i mentioned a moment ago that we are now using smart phones, not pay phones. president obama's strategy is a payphone strategy and we are in a smart phone world, so we are going to have to change -- what he is doing is stopping quarters into the payphone and cannot figure out why it is not working. it is not connected anymore, mr. president. it is not working anymore. we are going to hear about another stimulus and more quarters, trillions of them, getting stuck in that payphone, and i know the results. they will not be getting america
back to work, they will not be updating our economic foundation so we can have the kind of jobs we need, a middle-class that is prosperous, kids coming out of schools getting great jobs, leading the world in innovation, continuing to do so. these kinds of outcomes, that vision, requires a dramatic change, not more quoins in a pay phone strategy. -- coins in a pay phone strategy. this is not just one silver bullet, not just one idea in here. there are 59 of them, and i bet on every one of them to get our economy going. it is practical. it is not created by a professor working alone in academia. nothing wrong with that. this is a product of somebody who has spent his life in the private sector and has done business competing with businesses around world. it has been done with my team.
i have a lot of folks on my team that helped write this. this is the result of practical work, a practical plan to get america back to work and strengthen the foundations of our economy. it is also the media to. this is not something that will take years and years to put in place. from day one, i have five executive orders i will put in place. i wonder if that works. let's see. there we go, look at that. the magic of technology. day one, i will put in place five executive orders. the first one, is going to direct the secretary of health and human services to grant a waiver for "obamacare" for all 50 states. the second will put all of president obama's regulations on hold until we see if they cut jobs, and if they do, we will get rid of them.
the third one is open up production of energy across this country and get americans back to work. the fourth one is going to send a signal that while we love free trade, we're going to open trade in a way no other president has done it history, we will plan on china for not living by the roles they signed up to live by. we will make sure that they get sanctioned. finally, we will say to america houseworkers, we will protect you with the right to a secret ballot and will not have money taken out of your paycheck to go into political campaigns you disagree with. we'll protect america's workers from day one. i will also file five bills on the first day and looked for congress to get them enacted by 30 days ricks.
we will open markets, sine immediately the agreements that are outstanding with other nations like columbia, canada, and south korea, and we will open markets around the world and get american products around the slow. number three, domestic energy, we will pursue legislation that will allow us to take advantage of drilling in places across this country that are now closed to drilling. we want drilling for all well and gas that will creigh energy -- that will create energy. retraining -- the you know how many programs there are four job training? we note training for jobs for tomorrow is a poor. do you know how many federal programs are for job training? 47. 47 programs, eight different departments, managing 47
different programs. only five of them had been evaluated, and those were seen to be of very limited help. i want to take this 47 programs, cost them down to one, and turned them back to the states. the state should be running these programs, not the federal government. it says that there come a down payment of fiscal sanity. i will propose a bill and ask for to be passed within 30 days that will say we will immediately cut all federal spending by 5%, except in the military and entitlements. all discretionary spending will be cut immediately by 5%. this is a business plan for the american economy. we have to recognize our nation is in competition with other nations around the world. if we want to create jobs we the best planthave
and the rug. this nation cannot be stopped. the meeting seven us now is government and we are right to say, stop, the government, and let's start crowing again as a nation. [inaudible] that is the plan is not more than 25% of what has to be done. if we are going to get america going to again, we have to rely on other things. one is the american people. we will have to work hard and smart. we will have to tell our kids to get the best education they can, whether in vocational school, high school, college, to push them as hard as they can. we cannot think we are entitled to the great wealth we enjoy it. we have to work hard. [applause]
we are going to have starred demonizing other americans. one of the places where the president has disappointed me the most is the way he has attacked other americans and found someone to scapegoat for any kind of problem that exists. united we stand, united we stand hit if we disagree with other people, fine, talk about those, but do not turn other people into an unease. even the president is not a bad guy. he just does not know how the economy works. he never worked in the country. -- in the economy. i look forward to coming back into a real economy. let me mention something else. that is when you have a plan like this, and yet people ready to go to work hard and to pull together as a people, you also have to make sure you have leadership, leadership that is what they're doing and knows how to leave.
just having a plan -- a plan can be written by anybody, but it takes people and leadership to know how to execute a plan to make it work for the american people. i remember looking at companies like general electric back in the 1965 s, 1970's, apple computer, apple, what a company, even starbucks. there are stories there about the enterprises that have been led by individuals. what happen if there were competition between general election and a second-year business students describing what it takes to turn a visitor around? my guest is the student would win, but they would not have a clue of what to do in reality. there was a time when steve jobs was removed from apple computer. steve jobs was the real deal. he was a leader. he is a leader. he knows, he has done it before. that is the nature of real leadership.
i do not have all the answers to all problems that exist in america and around a world, but i know how to find the answers, and i also know how to lead. i was in the business year world for 25 years. i remember one of our very first investment opportunities in my company was to decide whether to put over $1 million of our investors' money into a new idea called staples, an office supply superstore. my team went around asking what they thought of the idea. every person we talked to said it would not work. they said people will not leave their offices to go by office supplies for a few bucks less. they want convenience, delivery, staples will not work. we proved them wrong. sables now employs over 90,000 people. -- staples now employs over
90,000 people. i went to the olympics. as i came they're eyeing went there in 1919 and -- as i came there, i went there in 1999. this people can together and i was part of that leadership team, and we were able to turn those games are around. dick ebersol said those are the most successful a little gay -- olympic games ever. i came to massachusetts after that. we had a $3 billion budget gap we had to fill. most people said you cannot do that without raising taxes. i said we've got to do it without raising taxes because that hurts people and kills business, and we were able to do it.
we balance the budget every year $80 billion rainy day fund for the next governor to use, and he has. [laughter] i have been in rooms with people who do not thing the job can be done. i have experience with the real world solving real problems. i know unity is key. republicans and democrats have to work together. democrats love america, too, just like we did. there is common ground. we want to get americans back to work again. i will use every ounce of my energy and every element of my devotion to get america back to work. i am concerned about middle income americans, families all over this country that have suffered under the obama economy. he is not a bad guy, but just as not have a clue of what to do. part because he has never done
that before. and i have. i have done it before, i will use of that experience to get america were taken, and i will make sure you will never have a question in your mind about whether the future is brighter than the past. it is, that is part of the american heritage. we will keep that american heritage alive and leave a heritage the world will always remember. thank you very much. i appreciate you having me here today. ♪ [applause] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] [captioning performed by national captioning institute]
welcome. a day early, but none too soon to get back to work for this congress. once again democrats are calling for this congress to get back to work and put americans back to work. in august we had an extended opportunity to listen to our constituents. their top priority is job creation and economic risks, protecting medicare, medicaid, and social security, and to strengthen the middle class. i will be very brief. there are a number of members to hear from. we had a strong meeting of our leadership on how we go for it, how we go to you with excitement about the optimism we have for our three very distinguished members who represent us at the table of 12, congressman -- assistant leader clyburn, and
ranking member cresaptown holland. we wish them well. we sent to the table with the highest expectations with the best goodwill and without drawing any lines in the sand. we look forward to the president's speech tomorrow night, but we continue our own initiative on job creation. we think it is getting back to basics about abc's. leader -- will get it right yet,, steny. a, basics as the abc's -- making it in america. mr. hoyer will elaborate on that. it is important to our spirit
for the the blood of our small businesses and to -- it is important economically to our national security that we are self-reliant, that we have the tools of production to defend the american people. building america's infrastructure very important. mr. cliburn will talk about that. that would be building america plus interest charges come and they will be talking about both of these basics, but we believe the spirit of keeping america number one of not putting people to work, will be well served by addressing the trillions of dollars invested in our infrastructure. c, community recovery corps.
that you had seen in the past few months, east coast, fires in texas, storms in louisiana and the gulf coast, there is a lot of rebuilding that needs to be done, and many of our members have told us they think it will be very important for us hire youth, and people, it might be senior citizens who can help in the rebuilding of communities. we think it is important and can be an economic boom that jobs created where people are hired from that community did do some of the recovery. in that spirit democratic, -- in that spirit, were to come from our ourwhip, mr. hoyer. >> thank you very much. all of us have just returned from the summer breaks, a lot of
us that not get breaks, per se, but we visited with a lot of people, both in our district and throughout the country to. it is no surprise they are very, very concerned about our economy, about jobs, and they continue to be concerned about the fiscal posture of their country. we need to address jobs and fiscal responsibility. in terms of jobs, we have had an agenda you see referred to as make it in america at jeddah. we have talked about that, but it is not just talk. it is substance. it is saying we want to make sure everybody in america has a sense, an expectation of success, that they are want to make it, and they're on to make it because they can get good- paying jobs and we are expanding our economy, not contracting our economy. economists tell us the best way
to do that is to expand our manufacturing. america still is a manufacturing giant in the world. but our place is not where it ought to be, and we have lost some 11 million manufacturing jobs over the last two decades. those were good paying jobs and they resulted in other jobs being created as well. three items in particular we want to focus on. first, the manipulation of currency. manipulation of currency by china and by others that make their goods cheaper to sell in america and american-made goods, quality goods, expensive to sell in our trading partners' countries. that is not consistent with roles for it is not fair to our workers, and we want to make sure we turn that around. we want to have a strategy, a plan. every team that wins the so
because they have a plan of how they are one to win. what plays they are born to run, who is on to do what, how we create an environment in which manufacturing can expand, so we need a manufacturing strategy. we have suggested legislation to ensure that we have that inquiry last, but certainly not least, over the 30 or 40 different league -- bills we have in the agenda, the infrastructure bank. the infrastructure bank -- we need to make sure we leverage significant amounts of private sector capital along with public alcohol in a partnership to expand and invest in infrastructure, which american needs if we are gone to grow our economy and compete with international competitors.
i expect the president to deal with that in his speech tomorrow. lastly, let me say that we have mr. clyburn, mr. van hollen, who are going to participate in the debt reduction committee. without any reference the taxes increasing, therefore bringing down the deficit. i believe very strongly that this committee must be successful. if it is successful, i think it will grow confidence in the private sector, and it will grow confidence in the international community, that american in fact can meet its challenges and make them successful. i hope all my colleagues, on either side of the aisle, and i know my three colleagues on the committee will see that end.
so let me now yield to the assistant leader of our party, mr. jim clyburn, to discuss and researcher and how we growth that and grow jobs in america. >> thank you, mr. whip. for those of you who have visited charleston, south carolina, in recent years," you probably have seen a magnificent new bridge. it is a talking point up and down the east coast. that bridge was made possible by a state infrastructure bank. the money is gathered by that bank and was leverage to secure a loan.
it is a man of isn't structured, but in addition to getting rid -- it is a magnificent structure, but in addition to getting rid of a toll bridge, we were able to heighten this man and widen the alleys so now megaships can come into charleston and create jobs ad itum. that concept should be employed at the federal level, creating a natural -- a national infrastructure bank, to be able to leverage moneys into the private sector and allow us to build roads and bridges, and i would hope it would be
infrastructure brought about for water and sewage programs as well. those are pretty big ticket items, but there are other infrastructure projects that we ought to be pursuing that will create jobs at the state of local levels. that is why two years ago i introduced the energy savings program that has been nicknamed -- star. that program was made possible by an incubator that took place in my congressional interest, and it was coordinated by four or five rural ruralcoops, a magnificent program if it were
to be broadened to the nation, it would create 60,000 jobs, renovating the retrofitting homes. in rural communities, many of the homes are basically >> it would allow the homs to be insulated, put on windows, and new doors. it would cause at the local building supply stores as well as put bricklayers, roofers,
electricians h. mack people back to work. --hvac people back to work. it will allow all these families to pay back the loans at last cost than they were experiencing before the retrofitting took place. this same principle, more urban communities. we believe that it will leave it to a significant, up to 25% deficit reduction, with these kinds of programs. it will sustain these over the long run. we are very excited coming back. i often hear people talking about the summer break. it is not always a vacation.
i held town hall meetings during this break. i am particularly impressed by the town hall meeting i had at a college in my district where the unemployment is 17%. these people did not want to hear me talking about cuts. they did not want to hear anything but jobs. they want to see us focus on jobs. they believe that if they can get a job, they will be able to pay taxes. their confidence will rise, and they will be able to help with deficit reduction and a way that will make all of us proud. i am pleased to be back here to get along with this work, and i am pleased to be joined with my colleagues on this committee. but i caution all of you, we are an appointed committee. the three of us appointed by the leader, not the chosen 12.
we will be limited by what we can do legislatively. with that, i yield to the chair of our caucus. >> we have just heard from james the apostle, one of the chosen 12. actually, and our caucus when jim clyburn speaks, we listened with great interest and intent as we have this. we have been homeless thing to our colleagues. i bring a perspective from the northeast. the dean of our delegation is back in the state where we suffered tremendous losses along our shorelines within the heart of connecticut amongst our farmers and some of the worst business interruption and power outages -- even greater than
gloria. whether it is texas fires, whether it is hurricanes in the gulf coast and mississippi, the devastation we have seen and i are members of to reap -- reporting the altering of their communities. we witnessed in paterson, new jersey where the president's trip has underscored an important agenda item that we have in terms of putting this country back to work and focusing as jim and steny and nancy have said for putting people back to work. they are most interested in seeing congress take action. with every catastrophe like this, it is underscored by the need for action. with that comes opportunity.
we believe that the opportunity here is for the recovery corps to take place. that means putting people -- not trading any new bureaucracy, putting them back to work under fema. putting them back to work under the department of agriculture. putting them especially back to work in our rural and urban communities where work is desperately needed. especially amongst our young. call it a civilian conservation corps, but we think it is important that we reach out in this manner and put america back to work again. this sunday will mark 10 years since september 11. we all remember because we gather together on the steps of this capital and came together as a nation. i say that because this is precisely what is needed at this point. not positions from either party, but coming together of america.
we are proud to lead the way and note that our members that have been selected to be part of the 12 have got a tremendous assignment as the leader has underscored the needs to succeed. the public wants it to succeed. we understand explicitly that job creation equals deficit reduction. nobody understands that better than my colleague of the airbus sarah, who is our next speaker. the jig xavier baccera. >> it is time -- i firmly believe the 12 of us who are privileged to serve on this joint committee understand that. perhaps our most important task is to put america back to work.
each and everyone of us has an obligation to commit almost to a bottom line that says anything we propose must lead to job creation. that should be the standard. if what you are proposing loses a job in america, we should not be moving on that. if it will create a job in america, let's take it to the congress and the president for a vote. there was a time when america created more than enough jobs for its people. we need to return to those days. there are americans today through no fault of their own trying to figure out how to balance their budget. it is hard to believe that america will figure out how to balance its budget if there are 14 million americans out of work try to figure out how to balance their budget. once they are back to work and they are doing their fair share as americans to pay their taxes, america will be put back on track.
we send a message to the president. mr. president, in two days, be bold. hit it out of the park. the american public is waiting for that leadership that tells us once again that we are ready to lead, not just the united states of america but the entire world back from this of this. whether it is on the select committee or whether it is right there in the white house, it is time for us to be bold and understand that our bottom line must be treating a job. one final point, too many people forget that the place where we are seeing job creation today, one of the sectors where we continue to see job creation -- the health-care sector. who would have said given all the talk about jobs destroyed reforms that were enacted last year that we would see job creation occurring at this dismal time in the health-care sector? the facts are, health care today is creating jobs.
one of the things many of us believe is driving the decoration is a platform that give some stability to the future for what people could expect from medicare and health care in general. if we are smart, we will look at what medicare can do with not just providing americans decent health care in their retirement but also what they can do to continue trading jobs. in the health-care sector, we are in many cases the result of this health care reform last year, trading jobs in america. it is time to do right by medicare as we do right by the american workers who are ready to go back to work. let me introduce our ranking member on budget. >> thank you. it is great to join my colleagues. as has been set two days from now, the president will come before the congress to deliver a speech on how to get the economy moving and how to get america back to work. i know he is going to need a
partner in the united states congress to get that were done. i know everybody up here plans to work with the president to do exactly that. i hope our colleagues throughout the congress, including the leadership of the house, will join the president as partners in that effort. i think it is very appropriate that earlier that same day, there will be the first meeting of the joint committee. the committee that is passed to look at the economy, and looking both at the short term and long term. i think it is a program that they meet the same day because as my colleagues have said and as we have laid out in legislation that has been introduced, the fastest and most effective way to reduce the deficit is to put america back to work. if you look at the most recent congressional budget report, they have indicated that for every one-tenth of 1% increase
in the gross domestic product, you reduce the deficit by $310 billion. the project over the next 10 years, the average gdp will be 2.9%. what those numbers tell you that is if you got a growth rate by half of 1%, he would reduce the deficit by 1.5 trillion dollars, which is the target layout in the legislation before us. my point is this -- a serious and debt reduction strategy has to include a major jobs component. it also has to include a balanced approach to reducing the deficit over a long period of time because we know that the challenges large. you need both, and you need jobs. both the simpson bowls report
pointed out how important it is to make sure we get this fragile economy moving again, both to put people back to work against a the get care for their families and have economic security but also as a critical part of reducing the deficit. these things go together, and i look forward to working with my colleagues on the committee, and the caucus, in the congress, republicans and democrats alike to do exactly that. >> thank you very much. thank you my colleagues. i am always dazzled by the commitment, the depth of knowledge, the degree of dedication that our colleagues have to try to make the future better for everyone in our country. as a talk about the abcs, making
any america rarely accomplishes that. mr. hoyer is other meaning of make it in america so the american people can make it in america is captured the route all that we are talking about right here or at the table to create jobs to reduce the deficit. none of it can really work unless we have -- address the human interest charges we face. we must have an educated work force, we must have work safety. these are public jobs. the public space must be respected if we are going to succeed and if we are going to keep america number one, if we are going to honor our commitment to the american people. so we are looking forward to the president's speech. some of the things he has said over the past few weeks give us some ideas were he may be going. one place i want to associate ourselves is his commitment to america's veterans.
they make us safe, and the home of the brave and the land of the free -- the land of the free and the home of the break. [laughter] i have to sing it. in any order, his commitment to our veterans whether it is tax credits or encouragement to the private sector or whether it is an example set by the federal government. or if it is as i would like to see, sandy-that has taken the lead on urging the federal government to honor its commitment to contract in for our veterans as we honor them to women and minorities as well. there is a lot we can do -- that congress can do in a very short time. i think that is what we will be hearing from the president.
we stand ready to help, we stand ready to compromise. i hope we can all make a difference. >> i wonder what you will do about chinese currency manipulation. the you have new legislation on that, or hard you attend to address that? >> we do not intend to speak about that today. >> we have had legislation on that. the senate did not move on it, we hope to either have legislation move on that in conjunction with their republican colleagues who will of course now control the agenda. but because that was supported overwhelmingly and because clearly, american workers making american products or selling services for that matter what products, have been disadvantaged by the manipulation of currency prices not driven by the market but driven by uncompetitive and we believe by relatives of international rules. but we also believe that the senate will move on that as
well. we also may have the opportunity to offer amendments on that issue. >> excuse me, the legislation does not deal with a specific country. clearly, china we believe is manipulating its currency. chinese goods are cheaper here and american goods are more expensive there which undermines our workers. but the legislation itself is not country specific. it says that any trading partner that manipulates their currency to the effect that and will be sanctioned under legislation. >> the discharge petition which i think all house democrats have signed, you'll have more on this on thursday. >> you said you want the
president to go bald and show his leadership. you have to get down to the nitty gritty and talk about entitlement and some of these different equations that have to be offered propelled gold and will the public perceive this to be when they see is a change to their benefits and for the cuts have to come from? >> my old personal opinion is we have to be bold and the super committee as well. if we are going to get america back on track, you cannot just fiddle on the edges. you have to really take on the sacred cows. if we take a close look at what drove us to these deficits, what turned us from having record surpluses in 2001 to have a record deficits in 2011? if we go after the main drivers of the deficits, we can not only put america back on track, but if we do it the right way we will put americans back to work. be bold, mr. president.
the cold -- the goal, congress. we have done it before, there's a reason we should not try. >> i have a follow-up to that to members of the super committee. if the president's rose out infrastructure projects, those come with the cost. will that make your lives on the super committee more difficult? >> no, not at all. one of the things we have been trying to say here is that it is absolutely essential to put america back to work if you want to reduce the deficit. again, just about every economist out there will tell you we need to do two things. we can walk and chew gum at the same time. we have to focus on getting america back to work. every day that the economy is stalled is another day that not only americans are not able to
provide for their family but another day the deficit grows. you have to get the economy moving again. the infrastructure projects, putting people back to work, repairing bridges and schools and roads and all those kinds of things are a very important part of it. has to be in context of a plan, i longer-term plan to reduce the deficit. that is going to be the charge of the committee to do those things. to recognize that they are mutually reinforcing. the faster you put people back to work as i indicated, the cbo says that you reduce the deficit at the same time. that is going to be a critical part, i think, of the work of the joint committee just as it will be important to find a balanced approach overtime to reducing the deficit. i think all of us the question was asked about going gold. i think all of us would like to set as a target for ourself even more than $1.5 tyrillion.
the bipartisan commission's up of four trillion dollars over 10 years. the action congress just took an early august was about $900 billion over 10 years. if we are looking for the four trillion dollar mark at the end of 10 years, we had a lot of work to do. but it begins by putting people back to work. >> frankly, the president is focused on the message that he spoke about. not only do i think he will make it more difficult, i think the president showed over the past six months as we dealt with the debt extension and the deficit reduction of fiscal responsibility how committed he was to that objective. contrary to what the premise of the question is if it will make it more difficult, i think congress, republicans and democrats, have a real ally in
the president of the united states to moving to a fiscally responsible outcome and a vote which will occur in december. >> part of the jobs plan [unintelligible] i am just wondering what the solution is? >> i think there has been a message that the president will be talking to the american people a way to not only trade jobs but to strengthen, again, our infrastructure. whether it is water supply, broadband -- it is not just roads and bridges. it is other things as well. as mr. cliburn talked about, it is other initiatives that will create jobs immediately. so again, the basic premise that mr. quarrier and everybody talked about here and mr. larsen
has been totally relentless on is that you reduce the deficit by creating jobs. you create jobs, you have to make some investments to do so. what is special about infrastructure as you heard mr. hoyer said, you could leverage your public dollars -- federal public dollars for a bigger purpose. so this is an exciting opportunity for us. i hope it will not the best. infrastructure has had a bipartisan support in the past. i hope at this very present time -- at this very urgent time, it will as well. >> let me just use as an example -- that program as it is currently being undertaken in my district allows for $7,000
per family. we are doing a 10 year program. this program allows the $7,000 to be borrowed, and you have to pay it back within the tenure. . you pay it through the co-op. if you're paying $600 a month in utility costs today, and that gets reduced to $280 a month, i only have a $200 repayment on your loan, the family benefits between hundred $50.200 dollars every month. with a net tenure. , you have people going back to work. you are purchasing goods and america, you're putting in bricklayers, electricians, back to work.
there are paying taxes. you look at that overall, it is a tremendous impact on deficit reduction. it is all done within a tenure. -- a 10-year period. it is being done right now, we are trying to take a nationwide. >> "national journal" camel with a couple of ex excellent articles. 11 ways to put people back to work without impacting the deficit whatsoever. 18 ways to invest in america and make sure we are both growing that the economy and accomplishing the goals that chris van holland outlined. this is an enormous opportunity for congress. let us be frank about this, when the general public's confidence in congress is at an all-time low. this is a chance for us to rally
together much like we did on the steps of the capital back in the aftermath of september 11. it is a time for us to seize greatness. that is why i think the opportunity is here. it is bipartisan. we are proud as democrats to lead the way and to have a president that is out there continuing to be an ally to both sides to make sure it is an america that we move forward to this time of crisis. >> in further response to your question, congresswoman is going door-to-door in her district following up on the damage from hurricane irene. i am sure she would be available at any time to let you know how the infrastructure bank leverage is public dollars in a way that represents a real savings to us. it is 100 days approximately until the -- what, november 23. mr. larsen of force -- mr.
lawson and force me 100 days, 40 legislative days. you have to make everyone of them count. you have to make them count in terms of growing our economy, to reduce the deficit, to create jobs. we have to make them count and demonstrate leadership of our country moving all doubt that we will be responsible as we prepare for the future. again, we are very proud of the president, we look forward to his remarks in a couple of days and we look forward to working with them to have success at the table of 12. that is absolutely essential, and we are all committed to that success. thank you very much. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] [captioning performed by
national captioning institute] >> president obama offered his plans for trading shops to a joint session of congress this thursday. live coverage here on c-span at 7:00 eastern. in a few moments, and look ahead to the 10th anniversary of the 911 attacks which homeland security secretary janet told -- napolitano. rudy guiliani on american security since 9/11. the head of the treasury station security administration on aviation security 10 years after the attacks. a couple of live events to tell you about tomorrow board. the center for strategic and
international studies host and all day forum on the terrorist threat. the event begins with remarks by homeland security secretary. the nomination of wendy sherman to be undersecretary of state on senate foreign relations committee. that is 10:00 eastern. >> in 1844, henry clay ran for president of the united states. he checked political history. he is one of 14 men featured an "the contenders. friday at 8:00 eastern. >> now, homeland security secretary and representative mike rogers used -- who chairs the house committee.
this one and a half hour event begins with secretary napolitano. >> good morning. thank you for coming out so early on back-to-school today here in washington for the first double header. we will have the homeland security secretary janet the politicians know. following her, we will have mike rogers he will be giving us a great tour of the world that we are very excited about. i like to think of america for our continued partnership. these breakfasts have been fun. begin to interact with newsmakers, and is a form for us to use in washington. are grateful for her support for that. hello out there in life's dream
land. we are grateful for you. if you are following us on twitter. you can suggest questions and critique and rebut your cells. two special guest today. and obama administration official, we are happy to have colbern here. he is a retired army colonel. and somebody who has been to every single play but breakfast. she is a graduate student at george washington. and, she is a post and can get you to the top of the list. that is tara. we appreciate your supporting the breakfast. we look is a good morning to secretary napolitano.
[applause] >> good morning secretary. thank you for coming out. thank you very much for joining us. >> thank you. >> different parts of your job, fema, and aggression, customs, tsa -- i feel like things can only go wrong. what is that like? >> it is absolutely a fascinating job. almost anything that happens in the united states somehow cut into the department of homeland security treaty on the mentioned a few of the components, you have the coast guard, customs and border protection, ice, we have and intel and analysis section. we have a cyber section. we have an office of health affairs to deal with pandemic. it is a very broad range
department, and the challenge is to manage that and it to manage it in such a fashion that we are doing all that we can to make sure that america remains a safe. >> your only the third homeland security secretary. do you still find yourself convincing people that you should have a department of homeland security? >> not so much that we should have a department but that we should stay with all of our relevant components. it is very interesting. when i was being prepared to be confirmed right at the beginning of the administration, there was a movement to remove fema from the department and have it independently report to the president. the decision was made that, no, it should stay within the department. it turns out that was the right decision. we have been able to by making changes with the month really improve the delivery of services, working a lot with state and local first responders which we have to do in other
categories as well. so it just leverages other works that we are doing. >> are you glad that you kept if the met? that must be taking a lot of your time lately? >> lately because mother nature has been awfully busy. we have seen in the last two and a half years, we have seen earthquakes, a tsunami, hurricanes, floods -- record floods, we have seen just about every national disaster you can have. and then you have to deal with it. >> it is too easy to ask you how you were handling these differ from katrina. i will ask you, how are you handling them differently from the oil spill? >> well, the oil spill, first of all, was a very different statute. there is actually an oral caused pollution act that governs how you respond to an oil spill. the star from a different place. when you are under the stafford
act, fema comes in from behind locals and behind the states. we come in when their resources are overwhelmed. the major change we have made in feed that over the past several years is not to wait until states or local governments get overwhelmed to but doing our best to predict when they will be stressed. we are sitting at the table from the beginning as a team to get the timeline. you can move quickly. it is really a local to state to federal handoff. in the bp instance, it is all federal and it needs to be. no states has the ability to deal with a multistate or else go from a mile underneath the ocean with technology that nobody possesses. the lead agencies are different. you manage it differently. >> it was not really gov. jim dolls the. he wanted to -- it was not really governor jindal's the.
for a while the one to handle it himself. >> all of the states had management plans for their own coastlines. none of them had a plan that would really cover the entire gulf coast. that was what bp really encompassed. we worked with the governors, we worked with the parishes in louisiana. we worked with the communities in mississippi and alabama. now, a year later as we look at the results of that war, which seat by and large the oil was kept off of the shores. there were resources there that cleaned it up immediately.
>> if it had moved to a mall to the west, and he would see it hit directly into manhattan which is what people were preparing for. in general, the path of the hurricane was forecast very accurately. what was not a forecast part is accurately is what is the intensity of the storm. i think we had carefully prepared that this was going to be two defense. he would have the coastal hurricane, then you have the inland flooding. it turns out the flooding has caused the most damage. >> how long are you going to be thinking about joplin? >> yes, although school has started. here is a city that was decimated by a tornado. we are lucky it was not on a school day because it took out two elementary school, a middle school, and the high school. and pulverized them. if there were students in there, there would be a lot more
fatalities than what we had. to joplin's credit, really a can-do spirit there. they are up and the school started on time. >> there was a partnership that schools are getting computers so they can have textbooks, do they still have needs or monetary needs or is it just the recovery and families regenerating? >> when you have a storm like that that is that destructive, monetary goes on for quite awhile. we have joplin, tuscaloosa, birmingham -- >> those were all tornadoes? >> the overall tornadoes from the spring. you have other needs appearing. you have irene, lee, katia perhaps, and then there is another depression forming off of the west coast i could come our way in the next few weeks. i never watch the weather as much as i do as director of homeland security.
i was the governor of arizona. i left arizona and it was like 75 degrees. it was in the third week of january and i got here and it was minus 20 degrees. remember how cold it was the inaugural week. i had to buy a coat. anyways, i would get a morning briefing. part of that is the weather. it would very kindly give me the weather in arizona compare to the weather in washington, d.c. so i could see. >> five days until the 10th anniversary of the september 11. how worried are you that there will be another attack? that anniversary will be used as an occasion to attack the united states? >> first of all, we do not have specific or credible information that an attack is pending. that is not to say that there is not. we have to lean forward working with localities throughout the
united states, working with the states. we now have the infusion centers and all of the states. these are centers where we have locals and defense and nicole located center where we can exchange real-time information and get information back. we have a lot more of an architecture, a structure throughout the united states by which to convey information and get information back. >> what have you been told about the likelihood either psychologically, historic clique that somebody will try to take advantage? >> we know from the information obtained from been latent -- of some of been layton's compound that he was focused on that day as an iconic date. we do not have much more than that. there is no specific or credible threat. it is a possibility. is also a possibility that we will have a lot actor or lawn will decide that this is a great
day to get some attention. i will do something. that will put even more emphasis on local first responders. people remaining vigilant. that is what we ask the public to do. remain vigilant as we go through this time. even as we commemorate the almost 3000 people could die in the attacks of september 11. >> is the next september 11 likely to be a lone wolf? have people sketch for you what the next september 11 might be? what do you worry about the most? it is a container? what is it? >> yes, yes, and yes. there are multiple ways and multiple kinds of threats. threats are ever evolving and changing. the kind of attack was on september 11 would be very difficult to carry out given the changes that have been made that are intel, better information, better checks on v says, --
visas, better security on airports, better targeting of passengers that need to receive additional screening, better hardening of cockpit door so you cannot get into where the pilots are. those are some of the few of many changes that have occurred since september 11 that would act to interrupt such a plot. >> with so-called spectacular is somewhat unlikely? >> i would say that kind of a spectacular is unlikely. the big complicated plot that arises from overseas would be much more difficult to accomplish successfully now given the many layers of protection we have built sen. >> a better listening? >> and no guarantees, but much more difficult to carry out. but we now have the rise of the so-called homegrown terrorists or extremist that might be inspired by al qaeda or some
other distorted ideology. that requires local law enforcement to be on their toes. it requires the american public to be on their toes in order to maximize our opportunity to interrupt something. >> you mentioned homegrown terrorists. you had a report about this early in the administration. he had a lot of blow back about that. have you pulled back a little bit from those sorts of warnings? what is your message about homegrown terrorists? >> we got criticized about how that was articulated. the criticism as i go back and look at it knowing now what i did not know that was that the process for producing the report had not been completed before was put out to the public. we have a process before we put out something, and you need to because lots of folks are paying attention to things that emanates and the department of homeland security. so we fix the process, but we had not shied away at all from
recognizing the at home crown plots, homegrown terrorists are very real threat to the united states. >> said he would not put out the report today? >> not as it was articulated. but the same kinds of reports we have been putting out and have been putting out very consistently during my tenure as secretary. >> tell us what homegrown and means? >> is exactly what it says. somebody who was in united states. we do not really grasp what turned on the trigger, but they moved from being kind of interested in it, boost to the point of committing violence against their own citizenry. >> so this is what would be like the attack on the federal building? >> like in oklahoma city. that is a homegrown terrorists. >> of things we worry about, where is that now? where is homegrown terrorism
now? >> is a key concern. it would rank right up there. i think the individual actor so there is no plot to interrupt, that is a concern. different kinds of big different ways of carrying out a plot. you have explosives, you have different types of potential biochemical -- other ways of trying to injure or kill a bunch of people the human mind is a very trade of mine. unfortunately, sometimes it is treated in exactly the wrong way. >> i hear you sing that a homegrown lone wolf would be high on the list of big threats? that is hard to detect by definition. >> it is. that is why there is such a -- >> a person is not the day visa. >> exactly. what we do look for its tactics and the techniques. things that are early warning
signs that something is going awry. >> give me an example of that. >> we interrupted a plot with the fbi, there are a key partner in the counter-terrorism center. we have some key partners in the homeland security enterprise. they interrupted a plot -- we together interrupted a plot that involves explosives hidden in backpacks. explosives were based on hydrogen peroxide. >> where was this? >> it was a plot that originated in colorado in the perpetrators were traveling to new york where they were going to let the backpacks. >> you have the similar christmas tree lighting in portland, oregon. that was also interrupted. >> right. let me go back to the colorado one because it demonstrates what we look for. then we send out a message to all of law enforcement to the fusion centers and say, hey, you
may want to drop by your beauty products supply stores or what have you in your area to see if there have been any other unusual purchases of hydrogen peroxide. we know you do not need that much, really for its normal intended purpose. so it is that kind of information flow to and from that maximizes our ability to interrupt even a non international, notcomplicated plot. >> so unusual materials -- what are the other things that we look for? unusual quantities of materials? >> unusual travel patterns. if somebody has been gone for six months to somalia and they come back. if that information is shared, that is something out local law enforcement can ask some
questions about. >> so i am curious, if i am an american citizen and i go to somalia, what can law- enforcement do? >> just ask and to snow. that is all. do want to be conscious of civil liberties and civil protections and we are. but that does not prevent a good law enforcement from looking for unusual patterns, tactics, techniques. things that we know our kind of triggers within the world of the violent extremists. >> there is a guy most people in this room have not heard of, he runs a website. some of you may have heard of it. >> i have my own nickname. it is kind of a deal. you know if you have made it when you get a nickname. i think my name is "big sis." i do not think he means it kindly, actually xxx to we get some red letters -- >> yes.
i think what he means is we are watching too much, kind of an orwellian view. he is just wrong. >> why? >> first of all, we do not do anything without running it through our own civil rights and privacy office. we are one of only two departments in the federal government that has a presidentially appointed privacy office and officer. >> you and who else? >> justice. we run all of our programs, our technology, all of those kinds of things. we think about privacy and went too much is too much. but on the other hand, our responsibility is to maximize our ability to prevent something violent from becoming successful. we are always striking that balance. we think we have hit it pretty right. >> what i thought you were going
to say, i thought you had a nickname or him? >> [laughter] maybe. no, i think we should try to keep our discussion at a high level. in any event, that kind of concern, there is too much intelligence gathering, there is too much of this, i think is overblown. the plain fact of the matter is, we live in a very complicated world where there are different sources of terrorism, of violence and extremism. we have to because it meant of all those forces, the ever evolving threat. we have to be changing what we do in order to maximize our abilities to prevent a successful attack. >> we were having coffee earlier, he is just back from london where they have cameras everywhere. could we be heading that -- >> a lot of cities do have
cameras. it depends on the locality. chicago, for example, new york city. they have lots of cameras. they have a screening room where they can watch different cameras at different times. they are a very helpful methodology, particularly in areas where we know there are constant threats. >> as the timeline there will always be more surveillance protection after 911, what you call them -- the things you put in front of a building, the concrete columns for car bombers? >> yes. >> does somebody know what those are? so are you always going to have more, or will we be potentially be able to do its smarter and
pull back on visibility and spending? >> our goal would be to pull back. to reduce the amount of inconvenience people in their ability to go through one building and out the next. we are dealing with the world were you also have lots of intended attacks on museums, the holocaust museum last year. government buildings of all types, what ever reason. i think the american people with few exceptions would rather be safer than sorry. we will have a baseline that is an elevated risk that we will always have to assume. we have something specific and credible, they were raised the
alert. >> the man had planned on the chicago tribune which the museum has posted a big beautiful -- the main headline is it is part of their september 11 series. the headline is "aviation security full of hassles and witnesses." why have you not made this available to the american people about their for screening? quick to think in general we have. i would disagree with the headline. the technology is getting better and better. we move to the new atm machines. why did we do that? because the terrorists, who continue to focus on aviation, this is a continued focus of attack. >> that is very interesting. how do we know that? >> mostly abroad.
>> they continue to focus on -- >> aviation, because aviation succeeded in the past. >> specifically u.s. airlines? >> and western. western europe and the united states. >> western planes remain big targets? >> yes, they do. to stick the christmas day bomber and 2009. -- take the christmas day bomber and 2009. we need to help detect these materials. originally, they had a very smudged version of a person. the new ones are the new software that is going in is kind of a stick figure that identifies where there are anomalies that need to be checked out. why do we do that?
we know the technique or the tactic trying to be used is to get into a passenger compartment of a plan and the cargo department as well. we know from the attempted yemen , non metallic explosive material that can take the plane down. we hope we will be able to make it easier for travelers. he will not have to be able to take off so much, your shoes and your belt as you go through the machine. >> i do not mind the shoes and belts. you can make me a better person. what i mind is ait is much more irritating and time-consuming. how many people have done that? you have to hold your hands like this. if you hold your hands like this they will stop you and tell you that is not the proper stance. >> you have to do with the right way.
>> you take everything out of your pockets. usually when you find out you're going to go through the ait, , unusual or what kind of feedback you get about it? >> actually when people use them correctly they like them. particularly people who have artificial joints to always get pulled aside if you are in the regular one. they do not have to worry about that anymore. you're right to see better technology over time that will allow us to reduce the amount of stuff you have to take off over time. secondly, the other thing is we are moving toward an intelligence and risk-based approach to how we screen passengers. it is also background. but non passengers who will pay a fee, and with that fee we can check out their identities and
so forth. they will be able to go through much more quickly. we will in a sense have prescreened them. we have a program called global entry that started very recently. some of you may have global entry cards. anybody here have one? if you travel internationally, you really ought to. it makes life a lot more -- >> would you agree? we are moving towards those kind of techniques which allow us to separate passengers from we have already prescreened and we have information from those we have not. that will facilitate people moving to the airports as well. >> i find this minimization very encouraging. what do you hope in time will be able to change? what is on the drawing board? i am sure you have seen the 22nd century screening. what we have to look forward to?
>> we but love to have a screening portal that you just that in and, boom, it has everything. it is painless and very quick. the technology is not quite there yet, and it will not for a while. i think one of the first things you will see over time is the ability to keep your shoes on. one of the last things you will probably see is reduction or removing the limitation on liquids. identify what is actually in a liquid and doing it quickly so you know it is not an explosive material, that technology is still in development. >> i will not beat this horse anymore, last question about this is, what of the current standards do you most hope to change? d.c. things about people in wheelchairs, mothers who are nursing. what about the current system do you hope and expect to change on your watch? >> i hope we will see more and more people with prescreening
with an identity card that will enable them to go through airports very quickly. when you say things like wheelchair's or mothers with blanketwe can't adopt exclusions -- >> of course, because then named -- >> and the exclusion is exploited by those who seek to do evil. whenever i hear late-night comics kind of commenting on this sort of thing or i see it in the blogs or whatever, i just have to help remind the american people -- we do not do this for the heck of it. we do this to make sure our airline system remains the largest and the safest in the world, which it is. >> injustice that we will bring in editor in chief of the washington post with a question. is the screening different from the old trusted traveler or is
it similar? >> it is still the same concept. >> is that something the government would do where is the contract it out? i can imagine this being a huge bureaucracy. how do you do this and how you get it done in the next few years? >> in the last year we did 1 million. it is really a matter of scaling up. there was for a while a contract it out company, they went belly up. that did not work. right now, it is within the department of homeland security. >> right now, what do you have to do to qualify? >> actually, you can go on to our website and download of the information at vhs.gob. >> so people could go on line and look at that? >> is. >> the that the speech to the lines, what happens? >> you get to go through lines more quickly and some lines you
do have to go through at all. which will bring in editor in chief to the "washington post." >> just following up on what you were saying, is more likely passengers will be able to walk through security with their shoes on bulk liquids are more difficult. this whole idea that tsa said years agoto carry your liquids , you are suggesting that is different? >> i do not know what you are referring to. this is a combination of a human effort in the airport and there are multiple layers before you get to the checkpoint. it stars before you get to the airport with looking at your record as a traveler, specifically for a international travel. there are undercover behavioral officers around the airport.
there are canine teams. there are extensive use of cameras. you have all of these players that occurred before you even show up at the gate. when you show up at the gate, you have to take off your shoes, i take your computer out of your knapsack. you are limited to the smaller bottles of liquids. in terms of what we see coming in the months and years ahead, it will probably be easier -- and it looks like it will be to deal with the shoes issue. >> you testified on the hill that the cost of people bringing their carry-on is through morerity was getting on expensive.
you suggested the airlines should work out some predict either they should be penalized -- what was it? something about allowing them to check more bags. it did not get a lot of pick up. >> let's try again. the airlines, by charging you to people aredg, trying to carry on more. so we're having to check on more before you can get to the gate and board a plane. that has a cost associated with it in regard to personnel and time. it was roughly $270 million we were absorbing because of this changed practice of the airlines. i was testifying. one of the things we have asked congress to consider was raising
the security fee associated with an airline ticket to include the cost to make sure airline passengers remain safe. the goal is to take known risks from intelligence that is gathered about threats to aviation and to deal with those in the best way we can. the threat to aviation has not gone away. we continue to work in that field. we work with the airline, the passengers, at the airport authority, but the goal is to make airline travel as seamless as possible. we recognize there are some inconveniences' associated with this. there are not some that are associated with the work we have to do. the solution to many is better technology.
>> to take a quick tour of the department here, another place things can go wrong is immigration. you are credited with having more border enforcement and occurred during the bush administration. is that true? >> we put a record amount of infrastructure at the southwest border in particular. we also have a plan for the northern border. a get less attention. let's talk about the south was border. congress appropriated initial money in a bipartisan vote that has enabled us to really do the things at the southwest border that i as a former u.s. attorney general have been asking for for a number of years. >> what is the biggest change that we can see at the border tax now there is a use a
fingerprint from local -- border? now there is the use of a fingerprint model from local authorities. what can be used to make it more efficient? >> one is what is going to happen at the port of entry were illegal travel and trade has to occur. legal travel and trade has to occur. there are jobs dependent upon the port and the border working efficiently. you will see more technology. there is a lot of a port construction. the amount of commerce and traffic has really increased through those ports of entry. many were built 20-30 years ago. they are archaic. you do not have the space you need to move through quickly.
that sort of thing. you will see more of that over the next few years. between the port of entry is illegal traffic. you will see more manpower and more technology. when i became secretary, we did not have complete coverage of the border by air. now we have complete coverage of the border by air. we also have a number of agreements with mexico for some things they will do on the southern side of the border. >> so the concepts are port of entry -- >> port of entry, being as efficient and smooth as possible, a lot of trade, lots of traffic needs to go there. >> the secret service now has an electronic funds addition to the mission. can you talk about that? >> the president is only one
part of the secret service. it is the mospart most associate with it. they deal with the bank fraud tie crimes for a long -- type crimes for a long time. they have moved into computer related crimes like money laundering and that sort of illegal activity using the international monetary system. >> we have heard about the commemorative activities around 9/11. what has been done of a racially to prepare? >> and many things we did many things have been put in place -- many things have been put in place. we want sunday to be a day of commemoration and remembrance. we wanted to be safe. not just dhs but a lot of other
state and local governments are making sure we are as safe and secure as we can be. >> as we say goodbye, a kid in my church whose family roots for arizona, and he went to arizona state. you have probably had that war. are you arizona or arizona state? >> it is a very good school. there you go. they are all great. i love them all. >> you have remained a diamondbacks fan. >> ps. they are doing very well. i try to get to a game while they were here but we were busy. i always try to catch a few baseball games.
>> i was told that you are into opera. >> yes. >> tell me about that. how is it d.c. opera? >> arizona has very good opera. watch out. i grew up in new mexico. i grew up with the santa fe opera. that is about the best summer opera there is. it is one of those things i grew up with and loved it. i go to the opera here. i think i have seen every production at the kennedy center. >> what are a couple of your restaurant here in d.c.? >> i am not sure i should get any particular place. >> there is a restaurant near my favorite bookstore. i like smaller and quieter places. >> do we expect to see you in terms of two?
>-- term two? >> this next week will occupy my attention. by the time we get their 9/11 and the storms after coming through and working on the congress with disaster relief, i think my plate is full. >> what are the chances of a term two? >> i think the president has been doing a great job. he has been dealing with so many things simultaneously. when you get to the actual election and people realize all the things that he has dealt with successfully, i am very optimistic. >> you are optimistic that he will be reelected? >> absolutely. >> you know geography better than anyone. what are your worries? >> i have to manage the most complicated department and the federal government. that is what is on my plate. >> could you imagine running for
office? >> i love being in office. i have a big job. at the number one task is to make sure i do that job as well as it can be done. >> thank you very much. it was kind of you to join. >> thank you. [applause] quickre going to do a costume change here and greet the chairman. if i could have -- he would like to ask a question of mike rogers, the intelligence chairman? we will talk about pakistan and libya. is there someone you like to ask him a question? does anyone have a question they
want me to ask him? ok. that is good. ok. ok. that is good. awesome. thank you so much for doing this. we appreciate it. welcome back from labor day. this is mike rogers. thank you for coming in. >> i appreciate it. >> no. my staff director was mike allen. it was very confusing. >> between us, it just about anyplace we go we can pick up
names. >> that is a good way to get into meetings. we will have to watch out. >> on the front page this morning, the efforts by u.s. to spy on israel. it said overheard in eavesdropping by the israeli embassy were american supporters of israel and at least one member of congress. did that report surprise you? >> anytime there's turmoil in the world, it the cia's job is to go out and get information. every once in a while they may stumble across a u.s. citizen. there are procedures in place to deal with that. it is my understanding they are doing the procedures according to rules and regulations. >> do you have access to stuff like that? >> as chairman, there is not much we do not have access to.
it is certainly over the course of time. in order to do the proper oversight of the committees and budgeting, it is important we get access. >> talk about what the committee does. its passage was interesting to me in dick cheney's book about when he was a freshman house member. he would go in there and sit down with the members and the "teach me everything but " it worked. -- and say "teach me everything." it worked. you were an fbi agent in chicago. what did you do to learn the world? >> exactly that. it is a tremendous amount of reading. if you want to understand current you have to understand the history. i did by region. i thought that was the best way to educate myself, per region.
and then travel. this is one of the few jobs for its is critical that you have to show up in interesting places. to ask questions, to understand their missions. i decided at one point i was going to follow -- i took a report. i said i want to understand how an analyst came to that conclusion and what information was developed from the field. i followed it from the field. i wanted to follow it all the way through. i disagree with to this place, followed people on the -- i physically went to this place and followed people on the ground. i found that to be one of the most beneficial things to get me up to speed in a hurry on the detailed operation of intelligence. >> you know all the secrets. there question for you was what
do you fear most? >> what we do not know scares me most. we know there are a lot of threats of both strategic and terrorism focused. we spent a lot of time focused on the terrorism threat. you cannot say too much. it was such a real threat and it is still ongoing. you need to spend that time and allocate the right resources. we have other strategic threats. we still have nuclear nations pointing missiles at the united states. we still have cyber threats that are growing daily and pose a huge challenge to the united states. all of those things we have to deal with at the same time we have to deal with the counter terrorism threat. one of the things that keeps me awake at night is the capability -- the cyber- capabilities against the u.s. that we are not prepared for, nuclear and biological -- at
least al qaeda of attaining that. we know there are materials out of the osama bin laden raid. backing keep somebody up at night. >> i am interested in what specifically worries you about cyber. could we have eight cyber pearl harbor? >> the cyber pearl harbor is a rhetoric to get people's attention. the real threat today -- and i'm not saying it cannot happen -- is theft of data at rest. >> what does that mean? >> that means intellectual property that is sitting on someone's computer that is pretty valuable, either from an intelligence or intellectual
property perspective, that the enemies would love to get their hands on. it is the new s&p and not of the next generation. h -- espionage of the next generation. they can steal something and remove it from the building. all of that still happens. their ability to reach in and still that information sitting on someone's computer is real and dangerous. it is not just government secret but commercial secrets. tens of thousands of times a day our government to get a ta -- gets attacked. we do not have a good number on the commercial times, but i guarantee it is at least as high if not higher.
the value of that kind of information to the chinese or russians were they can put it back into production quickly is invaluable to them. that is money they do not have to spend and research and development. that is the biggest problem that i am not sure about. we're doing ok. >> who is "them?" >> russia and china. there are others. there are other nations states engaged in cyber espionage. they are good at it. the two main threats are china and russia when it comes to cyber espionage. >> you talked about your travel. one place you traveled west to pakistan. -- you traveled was to pakistan.
i was disturbed by the story that said they looked at the chinese look at the remains of the fields. is pakistan looking better? >> pakistan is an army that has a country and not a country that has an army. when you do with pakistani have to do with the matrix that they are military structured and not civilians structured. the raid was a humiliating and embarrassing events for the establishment of their services. a ticket personally. >> do we believe they didn't know he was there? >> i have said publicly that i believe there are elements with; and the government -- within the government of that new. -- within the government that
knew. this is as diverse an organization as you can imagine. there are lots of taliban sympathizers with in their ranks. there are sympathizers with in their military structure. we know that. they are trying to manage a structure that they know has the sympathies toward the groups and there has been a strategic position on behalf of pakistan in the past to use the relationship to their advantage. and they like instability along the afghanistan border. that is not something they thought was a bad idea. they thought it was a good idea. they tried to use those things. i have said frequently and i have told them personally that it is very important if we're going to fix this problem that pakistan realizes that there's no such thing as a good terrorist.
until they come to that conclusion, we will have difficulties. they are not there yet. >> what do you think it will take? >> time is important. this was a solid indication that they are still interested in improving the relationship with the united states. i took that as a good sign. it is going to take a lot more than that. if they have engaged in some really bad behavior as of late, making it difficult for our diplomats to perform functions in their country. they have cooperated in some and not in some. full access to detainees has been an issue. they're making the job difficult. some of our diplomats are having a hard time getting visas in
the length of time. it took far too long to fix that problem. it was a conscious decision. they are making a conscious decision to make life difficult for our diplomats. that does not make for a good relationship. >> another place to have been is libya. you supported aggressive u.s. action in libya. he provided a pretty muscular defense of its. -- you provided a pretty muscular defense of it. >> some things went well. this was a nato victory some people would argue. it was important for nato to get into the game. i'm very concerned about the future health of nato. >> they're flexing arm muscles. >> we played an important role because we brought unique
capabilities. i was not advocating for boots on the ground. there are other capabilities we have the ability to bring that we did not. i argued that some are being left off the table today in pursuit of the weapons systems. that was my biggest argument for getting in. we believe the weapons systems are moving around. that is dangerous. >> you said the u.s. should use its capabilities to what the weapons that can bring down airlines. >> this is a big military. we have the ability. we have special qualified individuals who can go when, identify, account for, and render safe all types of weapons systems.
the anti-aircraft missiles are incredibly lethal in the hands of bad actors. >> where do we think they are now? >> we do not know exactly. we know where some are. >> how many? >> thousands. multiple thousands. it is disconcerting. there will be a black market. as this disintegrates, the next thing that will happen in the libyan economy, they will be on difficult financial times. that means everybody will suffer. the people who have access to this stuff, now it becomes a commodity. if you are hungry and what to feed your family and to have access to stuff that is free, it makes for a good cash transaction. al qaeda and others have
expressed an interest in getting in and getting their hands on it. that is my concern. the longer we wrestle around with you should be in charge of it and it does it qualify for boots on the ground if you send a small specialized team, we are doing a horrible disservice to our own national security interest by not taking a more aggressive posture. let's go get our hands on this stuff. >> what specifically should be done? how would you address this? >> i would allow our teams in conjunction with our nato allies who have been giving is great intelligence information and to have a good handle on weme areas on the ground, need a more specific mission. >> is this military or special forces? >> whoever qualifies to have the
special capabilities. it could be a combination of both. this is not the military. their sole mission should be to help the national council rid themselves of this problem. whatever government follows, if this proliferate, let's not make the same mistake we made in iraq. it caused a horrible problem for us in the insurgency. we know that. we know how it works. we know the time line of how it forms. we know have the capital forms. -- how the capital forms. i do not know why we would not want to be more up front. it is not just libya. we know several would love to have that. we know al qaeda has said they
want to get their hands on it. there are other organizations. organizations will lead to smuggle that threw into egypt. that is fact. i do not know why we are taking the time that we are to solve this problem. >> there were reports that gaddafi was part of a motorcade that went into niger. what have we heard of that? >> none of that has been substantiated. you will hear a lot of "w here's waldo" scenarios. it is important for our ability to get a handle on these systems and trying to cause some stability to cut off any insurgency that may be growing are developing. >> you're trying to avoid an iraq situation. what needs to be done there?
>> the black-market weapons is both a domestic problem and an extra no problem. i argue that -- and an external problem. i argued that from the beginning. you do not want those anti- aircraft and missiles. how do you get stability on the ground where you can get money flowing, not ours but theirs? we can help them through commercial interest and get that going. that gets them resources. --and there were problems like that in iraq. how do we get that cash into the hands of individuals who will put that money to use so that you have some sense of governance and progress? if you do not get it by the
libyans, you will run into the same kind of problems with a growing insurgency. in other places, you are likely to have insurgent elements. >> when you make the case that you just did to the administration, they say whitat? >> it is a work in progress. >> you said two or three weeks of the critical? >> i argued that. it is already tilting that way. one thing that is keeping all the ethnic groups and tried together istribes that they want gaddafi gone. when he is gone, that falls apart. they start to realize, now what do we do? when that starts to happen, all
of the problems will surface in moving to the next place. if we take this opportunity to fix the problems of our national security interests up front, we have that surge of diplomacy to help them so they do not run into the same kind of problems. >> the indications are that gaddafi is alive. >> i would argue that. i believe he is in libya. >> where will he go? >> he is likely to go to a place where he will have a very loyal defenders. he is very proud of his nomadic rouots. he used to entertain visitors by pitching a tent and walking across the horizon to meet them in the tent. it was very dramatic. i believe that will be his
natural instinct, to go back to the areas where he believed he will have enough people around him. what do you think he will make a dramatic exit? >> it is hard to tell. circumstances would dictate that more than anything. there is a major effort to keep peeling back people who are loyal to gaddafi and making sure they understand they will have an some role in leadership. we've learned that in iraq as well. be careful that you do not go through -- not everybody he was a member of the nazi party was really a nazi. that is the way you survive. those people need to have a way to get out and be productive citizens. we will continue to work on that with our nato partners.
they are working on those problems. how many are left that are really willing to die for gaddafi? that is the question. >> as you look ahead to the 10th anniversary of 9/11, how worried are you that some will take advantage of that to attack the u.s.? >> the fbi sent out warnings on general aircraft. >> is that what we call private planes? >> they want people to start paying attention. one thing we knew from the materials taken out of the compound was fixated. we knew that but to see it written out. it is an anniversary for us and we're taking it as a significant anniversary. so are they.
they have aspirations of dense, things they wanted to accomplish. -- events, things they wanted to accomplish. we saw a lot of aspirational events. this translates into lone wolf activity . arrear trying to be safe. we will air on the side of fashion -- err on the side of cation. - -caution. >> what constitutes that? remind theying to sectors that this is something they talked about. you need to be on right. -- watch. >> where will you be?
>> i will be at a speaking engagement in my home town. >> what became of the college library that they found a? >> it was removed for analytical purposes. it was collapsed on by experts and analysts. they are meticulously going through this information. it was done in an interesting way. is there something we need to be a worry about? they did an exceptional job of collapsing on this information. the first one was to make sure something bad is not going to happen tomorrow. is there some operational plan that we do not know about in the works? they are going through any intelligence value. >> it looks like a little less
than meets the eye. a lot turned out to be rantings. >> he was an aspirational leisure. to some degree and operational l-- he was an aspirational leader and to some degree an operational leader. he was bringing in new organizations. there is a relatively new addition to al qaeda. they were trying to school the new organization's about -- here is what your target focused need to be. that made him dangerous. he had the stature to deliver that message. it was incredibly important. the fact he was actively delivering that message told me how people in danger as he was and why it was so important to take him off the battlefield.
>> we have a friend from london who had a question for you. welcome. >> when secretary of napolitano was here, she talked about the renewed focus on home from terrorism. that is something in europe and london we have been focusing on for most of the decade and far right terror like we saw in norway. what lessons have you learned from the european experience that what do you think they are getting right experience -- what lessons have you learned from the european experience? what do you think they're getting right? >> we were making sure our system of accountability met up with the accountability and
transparency issues with great britain and other liaison partners. we have no better liaison partners and our british allies. nobody is as close. they rank up there with the canadians and australians. our services work closely together. in some instances, we had trouble sharing information across the pond because we have different rules for transparency than our british friends have. those are issues we are still ironing out. aside from that, we have learned about operations they have had and how we can apply that and their analytical project got them there. -- product got them there.
it has been valuable. we have learned from some of the things they do. the staggering problem for great britain is the sheer number of travelers to and from pakistan every year. it is an issue of concern for great britain and for the united states, because we know of the terror training that has happened in the tribal areas of pakistan. once they traveled to pakistan, somewhere in the order 400,000 a year, it is huge. i am sure it is a small percentage that are, but that is a difficult task for them to try to get their hands around. where do they go when they get to pakistan that are they going to the tribal areas? -- where do they go when they get to pakistan? are they going to the tribal
areas that we will only continue to improve that relationship. >> we're talking about that transparency issue. you talk about the different systems in place over there and here. do you mean that means things have to be disclosed and american intelligence is not being respected in the way that you need a? what are the transparency issues? >> disclosure is an issue on both sides. sometimes they give us information that they say is so sensitive it is not ready to go for prosecution that might end up in court. that goes back across the other way. it is a difficult proposition. some of these investigations you saw with the july bombings developed over a long time.
it could be afforded to have been disclosed early. any disclosure might have interfered with the next round. it is both ways. our systems are just enough difference that our intelligence services have to be very cautious about how they share pieces of an information. it might be disclosed. >> the "l.a. times" did an article looking at, and security spending and whether we're spending too much to keep us safe. they quoted a professor who says that maybe a few hundred people outside of war zones each year are killed by muslim type terrorists. it is the same number of people who die drowning in a bathtub
each year. is the u.s. spending money in the wrong ways to keep us safe? >> when you look at the economic impact of 9/11, we are still feeling that. we lost 3000 innocent civilians. that was a pretty devastating attack. some estimates are that it took a trillion dollars out of the economy. it was a time when the bridge as teetering -- when were were jus t teetering if we were going upp or down. if you look at the sheer cost, it is hard to argue to me that when you have a declaration of war on the united states by al qaeda and what happened when they were that successful, i would argue -- we have not had
an attack since. something is working. in the intelligence business, this is why this debate happens now. we do have a debt problem. we will have to find savings everywhere, including intelligence. however, we did the dividend where we closed down almost a whole continent to our ability to collect information about what is going on including places where there is a guy named osama bin laden roaming around freely. the world was changing rapidly. it is becoming dangerous and places that we had not predicted before. we need the information to take action or at least understand what is coming so we can try to deal with it in a diplomatic
way. we better spend every penny to do that. >> intelligence is becoming more important in military uses. they are almost all joint. if we have to find savings and intelligence, where should the government look? -- in intelligence, where should the government of? >> on the day of the earthquake, we thought we caused something bad. five minutes later, the whole building started shaking. we think we can find some efficiencies. we will merge some services. we will merge some training options. we think there are programs where we think we can get efficiencies by merging activities. at the end of the day, we are
going to save a significant amount of money. some of it is painful. it is the pride of ownership and someone does not want to get it up. because of the integration of the intelligence community, we think we can find the savings. i will not do it if i think it impact the mission. i will fight with my last breath if i think we will impacted the mission. i think we have come up with a good savings package that still allows some growth in some sectors that allows us to do research and development, allows us to improve technology, and saves money from last year's budget. not a sexy work. it is incredibly important. intelligence is becoming more important. we forget how important it is. george washington complained that he needed more intelligent if he was going to win the war.
this has been a debate since our founding. people are coming to the awareness of how important it is and how it can be such a value added to prevent trouble and to deal with trouble when you see it. >> as you look ahead -- i know what it is. a week from today, next tuesday, you are having the first joint house/senate hearing since 2002. you are looking at how these structures have worked post- 9/11. what is the most important thing you hope to learn or find out that >> we can always improve ourselves refined output -- important thing you hope to learn or find out? >> we can always improve ourselves. are there places we can get out?
in the old days you use to adjust your carburetor -- you could adjust your carburetor a little bit and find out what is working. what is not working we should not have any authorship claims not to try to fix it. >> having a director of national intelligence, you are not looking at changing something that they? >> i do not think we will come to that conclusion. dni has done some things well. it has done some things that need improvement. there was a mix of personalities. the changing of the post did not help it. you're taking the president daily brief and putting it into dni.
it allows the dni to reach to other agencies to get different opinions. now it is not just the cia, even though they may be the largest driver of that document. it allowed dni to get a second opinion. that is a healthy thing. i looked at that as a powerful thing for improvement. when you spend that much money that quick, that is where we can get out and make significant differences in the bureaucracy of any organization that is this big. >> is the country clearly better at connecting the dots? is the jury's still out? >> we are definitely better. we're not where we want to be. the christmas day bomber is the greatest example of that. there is information out there. i am not sure it would have
stopped it. it may have stopped it. there was a review about no-fly list and how we get information to the right place. we had information but not in the right place. that was a failure for the intelligence business. for the luck of a heavy finger on the syringe, that would have been a different outcome. they looked at that as a successful terrorist event. they found someone, and trains somebody, -- trained a somebody, bought them on the airplane. -- they found somebody, trained somebody, and got them on the airplane. >> real quick, how was leon
panetta? >> i thought he was good. we had a rough start. i came to respect his ability. i thought he did an exceptionally good job. we have a great working relationship. we talked multiple times in a week. he repaired a lot of mistrust between the cia and congress. from both sides of the aisle, i thought that was an incredibly important thing. he put the cia back on a positive track of focusing our energy on improving getting better versus the fighting about the cia being a bad organization. >> what advice would you have for general petraeus as the transitions in to be the director of the cia? >> transparency is important. do not go back to the old days of hiding things.
i will find it. >> what do you specifically mean by transparency? >> not things necessarily to the public but we have a lot of dialogue and things that we track the daily. it is a part of our oversight responsibility. every single member takes it incredibly serious. it is a big responsibility. it is classified. we better get it right. the challenge for general petraeus is clearly brilliant. he will do a fine job. the biggest challenge is that he spent the last 30 years in the military wearing a uniform. that culture is very different. when you're in that environment as a combatant commanders, you get to pull all the levers every time you say. >> what worries you? >> i am not sure it worries me. it'll be interesting to watch him make that transition.
it is a difficult transition. he will do it fine. >> you were given credit for straightening out some of the oversight which was wrinkled before. what did you change that wise it running more smoothly? you change?ed you changedid why is it running more smoothly? >> when it happened inside the committee, it was horribly unproductive. i was concerned. it was taking its toll on the intelligence committee. >> what do you mean by partisanship? >> all the added to crept into
the committee. we need to go get into this and we need to investigate them for this. if there's something that needs to be investigated, i am for it. it is our job. to make it so public and come to conclusions before we had even finished the investigation was a horrible thing. i developed a great relationship. i trust him. he trusts me. we can disagree. we can do it in a way that is not unproductive. that is how you come to conclusions. that was incredibly important. we read engage the entire committee with the intelligence theunity -- we rengage-engaged entire committee with the intelligence community.
they have committed their lives to this. nobody wants to be called a traitor or a criminal or a liar after doing all of that. we were able to repair it on a personal level, reinstated the oversight responsibilities. we missed a lot. a quarterly review of all intelligence activities redid i cannot tell you the last time that happens. -- a quarterly review of all intelligence activities, i cannot tell you the last time that happened. for the first time in six years, we passed a real authorization bill for the intelligence committee that they were craving to have. a because of partisanship, we cannot get it done -- we could not get it done. hopefully by friday we will have another one.
our credibility is back. at their credibility is back. >> next question. i believe the unemployment rate is 10.9%. i wonder what the outlook is for the president's reelection. >> bid tend to be a very blue states - it tends to be a very blue states. we are in manufacturing state. i was talking to a small manufacturer. the last round of epa rules cost him $58 million in final costs to comply. he does not know what this next one will cost. he has no idea. his productivity fell.
it sounds great here but it has real implication to people who are trying to build things. unless he comes out and says he is ending his declaration of war on the american enterprise and have day moratorium for any new rules and regulations and have a plan that produces american energy and i will not raise your taxes, that would allow these companies to make decisions based on what they know versus what they think might happen. >> they thought it would save them. >> it'll take more than that. the pressure they're putting on manufacturers is incredible. he is a very good chance to lose michigan. as campaigns go, between now and election day is a long time. >> are you worried about republicans losing the house?
>> i think we will pick up our numbers. they cannot untwine the policies they have done. the anger, as great as it was leading up to this election, this is their job. this is their ability to feed their family. it is being challenged. >> i want to thank bank of america for making this discussion possible. thank you for coming out early. thank you 48 fantastic conversation. >> thank you for lowering your standards and letting me on. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011]
>> this meeting, in the 10th anniversary of 9/11 with coverage from each of the memorial site. here's our live schedule. saturday on c-span at 12:30 p.m. eastern, the flight 93 memorial ceremony from pennsylvania. sunday morning at 8:30, the ceremony from the world trade center site with president obama and former president bush. then a vice president joe biden from the pentagon. at 9:30, honoring those who lost their lives on flight 93. this is this weekend on the c-
span networks. >> in a few moments, the former new york city mayor on the securities since the 9/11 attacks. in an hour, the head of the transportation security commission on aviation security 10 years after the attacks. then mitt romney outlined his plan to create jobs. later, another jobs plan from nancy pelosi. >> "washington journal on" -- on "washington journal" we will focus on jobs and the economy with karen kerrigan, dr. francis collins. we will be joined by bloomberg business week writer roger lowenstein about the decision to
stop backing the u.s. dollar with gold and how it at that the u.s. economy today. "washington journal" everyday>>e candidates, see what political reporters are saying, and track the latest campaign contributions with c-span's website for campaign 2012. easy to use, it helps you navigate the political landscape with twitter feeds and facebook updates from the campaigns. candidate bios and the latest polling data, plus links to c- span media partners in the early primary and caucus states, all at -- c-span.org/campaign2012. >> former new york city mayor rudy giuliani says american security is still vulnerable 10 years after the september 11 attacks. speaking at the national press club, he said that u.s. troops should remain in iraq and afghanistan until al qaeda is no longer a threat. this is an hour.
[applause] >> on sure where that terrorists might strike next, george w. bush was largely out of sight that morning on air force one. it was our cast speaker, all lame-duck mayor, who assured americans that the nation's greatest city would survive even as smoke and fire was in deep blue sky. he had his task of four as and as u.s. attorney for the new york district. no stranger to washington, our guest speaker asserted -- served as associate attorney general during the reagan
administration. when he became mayor, new york seemed overtaken by crime and urban decay. our speaker is credited with reducing the crime rates and improving the quality of life, in particular, cracking down on your losses such as how aggressive panhandling, and very relevant to the state, given the taurus and there, for cleaning up times square. wally does not insist on an, it would be appropriate to call may urge early on -- mayor giuliani serve. it is a reminder that is a survivor of prostate cancer. he leads a security form which helps businesses and governments prepare for disasters. we will be asking him about his thoughts on the political landscape. a political moderate, at least the way it turns out these days, and he ran in 2008 for the republican nomination.
although he topped opinion polls, he did not fare as well in the primaries. we're told he has not officially ruled out another month for the white house, a decision he says he will not make until after the 10th anniversary of 9/11 passes. he said he would focus more on the economy than national security, and tell me if we're wrong, if you have to talk about what people are concerned about. and what they are concerned about is the economy. today as we approach the somber anniversary, our primary focus is the state of the nation's security a decade after the september 11 terrorist attack. as i began my term, i made it a priority of my own to land the top notch speaker for this occasion. i am especially grateful that he is accepted our invitation. please give a warm national press club welcome to rudy
giuliani. >> thank you very much. thank you. thank you very much. he is the 104th president of the press club and i'm the 107th mayor of new york city. i am very pleased to be here. this is always a difficult subject for me, because the whole recollection of and thinking about september 11 is very complicated. very complicated because it was the worst day in my life, where state and a life of my city, and to some extent, i imagine the country. and in some ways it was the greatest day, the most glorious day, because of the display of bravery and fortitude and strength that people showed. and i have been given a lot of
honors, of various kinds, including being knighted. i do not use the title sir because my friends back in brooklyn would be me up. [laughter] if i tried to use it, and if i ever have any hope of running for any office again, i better not use it very to appropriately use the title, you have to pronouncer citizenship. ain't no way. [laughter] a lot of the praise, honor, whether it was being knighted or awarded by mrs. reagan, which i'm very proud of, i feel very humbled by that because i was standing on the shoulders of giants, of people who really did the brave work in the difficult work and the courageous work. and two of them are with me today because they worked in my administration with me. one is former deputy mayor rudy washington, one of four deputy mayors in new york city.
he organized our effort to bring in heavy equipment that day to try to save lives, organized our effort to recover, he was totally dedicated and work 24 hours a day, probably, for four straight months. he has suffered some ailments as a result of that -- being at ground zero so often. he is one of the people that was affected by that. respiratory system affected by it, he has handled that with consonant bravery. and he has recently made the news or some trouble, if you want to call it that, by urging that they include a religious leader or religious leaders as part of the september 11 memorial next saturday. [applause] the commissioner of the mayor's office, richie have a long
history of being with a fire department and police department. have intimate knowledge of the in -- of the communications system and the response. he is one of the people the prepared new york city for whatever emergencies he could possibly think appeared we had 25 emergency plans and would practice them all the time. and we would try to continue to improve our situation. on the day of september 11, it was ready and richie with me when we were trapped in a building and it took us 20 minutes to get out. on reflection, we could have lost our lives. at that time, you did not think that way, but when i went home and watched it, i said, oh, my goodness, we were so close. we were 2.5 blocks away from the first building coming down. it hit our building. -- remained tremendously, and responsible. he led the recovery effort
effort, which many people do not to understand -- i am not going to say as complicated as the immediate response, but almost as complicated and dangerous. everyone that worked there for the next three or four months had their lights at risk with the buildings that could easily have fallen down, the fires below the ground, the enormous heavy equipment. when we build a building in new york, we often lose three or four people because it is inherently dangerous to do a construction project. somehow we got through that whole four months without anyone being seriously injured. some people are seriously injured now and they should be abandoned, but i would not have believed it possible that we got through that period without a serious injury. richie is one of the reasons for that. he is one of the foremost experts on emergency management in the country. did not have people like rudy in ritchie, i would not have been able to do it, and there were many of them. [applause]
so how you relate to september 11 and whether the country is safer now or not a safe and what should be done about it? it is a defining event for our country. whether we think it is or not, it is, because it is one of those events that people remember where they were when it happened. in my lifetime, i can relate only two others, one before i was born and one when i was in college for the first one was pearl harbor. my parents and everyone of that generation would constantly tell you where they were when they heard about pearl harbor. the second one was the assassination of john f. kennedy. i remember where i was when i heard about the assassination of john f. kennedy.
everyone in this room could immediately decide where they were. in the third one is the timber 11, 2001. everyone remembers where there were when the attack on the twin towers, on washington, and over the skies of pennsylvania happen. in fact, this is almost completely accurate, i cannot think of too many times that i spent in an airport, including in singapore and tokyo and south africa, where people have not come up to me and said, do you know where i was on september 11? and then explain to me in detail where they were. the first couple of times that happen, i found it very strange. the answer was always, no, i do not know where you were. do you know were i was? i remember where i was. i do not know where you were. i decided that i had become a repository for people feeling like they have to explain that.
it is a defining event for us. right now as we enter into the second decade of the 21st century, it is a defining event and it is tremendous implications for us. and it has implications that we still do not quite understand, because i'm not quite weak -- i'm not sure that we quite understood all the implications of pearl harbor or the kennedy assassination. here are some of them. and some that i think we can learn from. when people in your a dramatic event -- in your -- endure a dramatic event, they become immobilized and defeated and crushed by it, or the growth of it. on the evening of september 11, i asked the people of new york, i think it might have been
dissected till last statement at the third press conference that we had, and we're all exhausted. probably in shock. i said, i want the people of new york city to emerge stronger for this. i remember thinking as i walked off the podium, that i was not sure if that was a exhortation, an admonition, or a prayer. i was not sure that we had emerged stronger for it. i thought that we would, i hope that we would. i had the essential fate that the people of the new city and the things much better -- big things much bigger than small things. there is a pothole or you do not get rid of the first snow, they want to impeach you. but if there is a train wreck or a blackout, they just rise to the occasion. the people of new york really did rise to this occasion.
they have been stronger and better than even i thought it would be. new york city is focused on the new york city, which was the center of the largest attack. new york city now has more people living there. new york city has more tourists. new york city is economically sound or, even with the recession and the problems we're having now in our economy. new york city's economy is not as affected as the rest of the country. it is a more diverse economy. there is absolutely no feeling that i detect that people do not want to come to new york, because they are afraid of the attack or september 11, or afraid of the realistic advice that new york city is a major target to this day. there's absolutely no one that does aa that they would not attacked -- that does not believe that they would not attack york city in. in fact, there was an attack on your's times square. it was full.
resilience is a defense against islamic extremist terrorist -- terror, an important defense. the first reason they attacked us was to kill many, many people. they ended at killing almost 3000 people. the worst attack in the history of our country very worst -- of our country. worse than pearl harbor. they did damage to us, damaged i still see and ritchie does and rudy, because it plays out in people's lives. i do not what my feelings will be on sunday when i see so many of the family members again, that many i saw for the first time at the family center or at the site when i took them there for their first visit, or the many funerals and wakes and
memorial services, some of thie families are still very close to me, my closest friends. it has played out in their lives in ways if you can imagine. children go without fathers or mothers, people cannot cope with a memorial service because they cannot deal with the fact that it happened. others have moved on, but they did achieve that significant damage that is almost indescribable and will continue until we move on to another generation or generation after. but on the other side of it, i think they wanted to kill more people than they did. the first estimate that was given a number people that died at the world trade center was given to me on the street after we got out of the building we were trapped in. after the second building came down, and we saw the cloud rushing through the street, i turned to my communications
director and ast, tell me the number of people they think are missing. i was trying to calculate what kind of help to the fire department aide, what kind of help to the police department need, are these numbers we could handle, what we have asked for the national guard, and within 10 to 15 minutes, she got back to me as we were walking to our new command center, she got back to me, and she said, the part authority estimates about 12,000. i said, how the thing to do that? they tried to calculate the number of people on the building when the first plane hit and the number of people you could get out in that. out of time, and they calculated about 12,000. i'm going to tell you the reason it was not of thousand. it is the bravery and courage and a loss of life that occurred to the members of the new york city fire department, the new york city police department, the port authority police department, and some very brave civilians who stepped up and
guided people out of the building. i do not cut -- get told this is often about -- often, but more people tell me, it was not for your fire department, i would not have made it out of that building. there would say to me, you cannot of action -- they would say to me, you cannot imagine how much confidence it builds up in you when you are walking out of a building that is on fire and men are walking into that building. and do not seem to be afraid. the continue to walk again. they did not run out on the first sign of evacuation. that saved incalculable numbers of lives. there was an orderly exit. things far less dramatic than the world trade center attacks have led to riots in which many people died.
that is because of the bravery and the inherent courage of in york city fire department, the new york city police to farming, the port authority, and individuals like the one movie is being met about, the last one out. i think he saved a couple thousand people. that the mall on elevators, forced them out, and said he would be the last one out, and he never did get out. that prevented it from being worse than it was. it may be prevented the terrorists from achieving their -- whatever there weird number they had in their head. the sec reason that they attacked us was to break our spirit. -- the second reason that they attacked us was to break our spirit. the purpose was to break our spirit, and it was accidental but they said elected washington, d.c. and new york city. the capital of in this case, the political capital, and the economic capital of the world.
what is at the core of their hatred of us? our politics, our economy, our belief in various religions as opposed to what they believe is the one true religion. our political right that we give to women, that we give to other people. these are reasons that they hate us. was not accidental that they attacked washington and new york city. the purpose of it was to break our spirit. to demonstrate how week we are. to demonstrate how they doing this, that would put our economic system in chaos, they put our political system in chaos, and the would show how much better as a world ruled by theocracy could be. well, boy, just the opposite occurred, right? from the first moment of the firefighters walking into the building, not running out, to our political people all coming together, man, we should have
bottle that. [laughter] oh, it was fabulous. i was the mayor of new york. i had all the support i could ever possibly ask for from president bush. from the democratic members of congress. i had many gatherings of democrats and republicans going down to ground zero in talking about how to prevent another one and the american flags all over the place, being waived. i rode with president bush of west end avenue on a very famous day, september 14, to thousand one, after he went to ground zero. -- and the car with me and commissioner carriage and commissioner von essen, all of whom are big guys. one of them sat on his lap. [laughter] as we're going of west end avenue, there were flags all over the place your people
yelling and screaming, god bless america. blowing kisses to president bush, we love you. i cannot help but looking at them, and i said, mr. president, i have to tell you this, not a single one of these people voted for you. [laughter] and i think four of them voted for governor pataki and me. this is not our part of timown. for republican, there is no part of town except staten island. but the reality is, we achieved a unity that most of us had never seen before. and it is because something when you're became stronger, not because it is new york, a bit -- but because they are american. america became stronger because realize how important freedom
was and to defend it and to remain together when that happens. those are all wonderful things that emerge from september 11. i have absolutely no doubt that if god forbid we were attacked again, whether it happens under president obama, i certainly hope it does not, or under another president, that we would have exactly the same reaction to the president said about a year ago, and some people criticized him for this, but i thought it was absolutely the right statement, he said, america, something like america could not handle another attack. he was not inviting one are suggesting that we would have one, just dating the office. that we could and it is important for the terrorist to know that. resiliency takes away a lot of what they think they are going to do to us. what do i think the country has really not been attacked since september 11? i have to tell you, if i take
myself back tenures go to the morning of september 11 and september 12 and 13th and 14th, and both of them will remember this because they were at all of these meetings with me, we were being warned of numerous attacks. on that very day, we did not know if there would be another three or four airplanes that would attack is. a lot of our response, when people look at what we did and why we did it and the right decisions in the wrong decisions, but a lot of our response was not just to say that many people at the site -- save many people decide what -- but to prevent further attacks which we were told were going happen and what happened in the aftermath of september 11 and for many years to come. there is every indication that that was the case. there have not been a lot of attacks. there have been at least 40 attacks in the united states since then, a lot more than people realize, and those are 40 that i can find from public
documents from my previous experience in government. i can assure you that there would be a lot more. but for one, i would consider major hassan's attack on fort hood and islamic extremists attack. i cannot see what of government as i see it that way since he was yelling allahu akbar. that would be good evidence as a prosecutor as to why he was doing what he was doing. but we have been saved, although a great deal of hard work has gone into it. i will show you the reasons why i think we were saved, and we have to do to continue to remain safe. we won on an offense starting with the war in afghanistan and the war in iraq. i think tying up al qaeda, tying up other groups that would try to rival and equal what al qaeda would do in foreign wars, it was
enormously effective in slowing them down. it also gave us a plethora of intelligence that we would not obtain if we were not pleasant there -- present there, if you are nodding cage in a war there, capturing people, questioning people -- that intelligence was not available to us before september 11 because we did not have a major presence in that part of the war. the biggest fear that i have is that as we get to the 10th anniversary of september 11, people are going to believe it is over. there is nothing special about a 10th anniversary. one of the women who lost her husband, was talking to are a few days ago and asked her, how would you deal with the 10th anniversary for summer she said, is no different than the ninth for the 11th. for the day after. that is true.
there's nothing special about the 10th anniversary. it just happens to be a numerical computation that you may. here is the simple fact about september 11 that should be emphasized over and over again until the 10th anniversary is over. september 11 is not yet part of our history. pearl harbor eight is part of our history. pearl harbor is over. that war was one very our enemies have become our good friends. you can do it in less analysis it for purely historical reasons and to learn from it, but it is not part of our present reality. september 11 as part of our present reality to the reasons i mentioned before and some others, for which those people attacked us on september 11, live. the people who attacked us under that banner of distorted islam still want to attack is under the banner of this -- distorted as long. and they have plenty to do it as
we memorialize the 10th anniversary, arguably with even more force, maybe less, maybe they will resort to weather wasn't doing it. but we can i use this as an opportunity to say, oh, let's put this behind us. -- we cannot use this as an opportunity to say, oh, let's put this behind us. it does not evaluate correctly the scope and danger of islamic extremist terror purred notice i use those words and i use them often. i have a simple believf. if you cannot face your enemy, you cannot defeat your enemy. can ominous -- if you cannot honestly describe your enemy, there are distortions in your policy decisions as a result of that. there is nothing in salting to decent good members of the moslem religion by side -- by my saying islamic extremist terror, any more than it was
insulting to the italian community for me to say the word mafia, or do decent germans for me to say the word nazi. our family here to do it could lead to a series of mistakes in the bahamas and the figure appeared one mistake to avoid is political correctness. you cannot fight crime and you cannot deter terrorism if you are hobbled by political correctness. i believe that major hassan is an example of that. there is no way that major hassan should have been a major in the united states army, and for several years, building up that hatred for the united states of america under the banner of distorted islam. if we want to learn from september 11, here is one of the first lessons to learn. do not underestimate your enemy. do not be afraid to face your
enemy honestly and squarely. do not be afraid to discuss it honestly. and do not create within the bureaucracy, including the bureaucracy of the military, a fear of doing the right thing because it will be misinterpreted. most human beings are not heroes. most human beings are not going to get a chapter in "profiles of courage." most human beings do what is expected of them, and that is to ignore reality, because when they get in trouble, they will ignore reality and we will be the worst for. the second thing i believe that we have to remember as we come out of september 11 is that there is an impatience that has developed over the last two years to our military presence in iraq, afghanistan, and some other parts of the world. that is an understandable impatience. we have been there a long time.
and we have lost so many wonderful, innocent people, people who just want to serve their country, and they're the ones to show it -- who choose to serve and they lost their lives. it is understandable and a good country a desperate but leadership is say to the american people that we have to be present in that part of the world in spite of what public opinion polls say. we have to be present in that part of the world until that part of the world stops making plans to come here and kill us. isn't that why we were in germany? for as long as the time we were in germany? isn't that why we were in europe? isn't that why ronald reagan appointed cruise missiles at the soviet union in the 1980's, because that part of the world's endangered our survival? isn't that why we remained in south korea for as long as we have? it was our leadership,
republican, democratic presidents from truman to george bush the first, they understood that and our leadership now needs to understand that your we need to be militarily present in the middle east until significant numbers of people in the middle east stop planning to come here and kill us or callous overseas. and we should get the american people ready for that. we should make impatient with that. we should get them to understand the value of in terms of intelligence, the value of it in terms of stopping things before they get to the point of people tried to kill us here in the united states or attacking one of our embassies abroad. we should explain to people how that has a deterrent impact, this is 100,000 american troops in that part of the world, the deterrent impact on these miserable dictators. it would be nice if it were different. it would be nice if we lived in some perfect world. but that is not leadership. leadership is helping us to live in the world that we actually
live in. my final thought about it is, in addition to those things that we have to do, in addition to the fact that we have done some very good things, both in the bush and the obama administration, in improving airport security, and significantly improving intelligence gathering and a flow of intelligence, which also had a big impact on preventing those 40 attacks and more, and the good work that both president obama and president bush did in the long-term effort to catch bin laden which was a significant achievement and a significant achievements we're having now, we have a tendency to think that the next attack will be like the last attack. we've done a good job of preventing an attack like september 11 from happening. it doesn't mean it will not happen but we of done as good job as a kindred port security has not been improve the way that it should and it needs that kind of attention.
we should get out of the mindset that the next attack will be like the last one and we have to start thinking about, what else might they try to do? will they decide that they can do small attacks in smaller cities as a way of disrupting as? and we have to prepare for that. and we have to say to ourselves that we have let our economy and our budget get so out of control that it is beginning to become significantly and really a national security issue. when this country has to worry about whether it is spending too much money on defending us, then this is a national security problem. republicans and democrats should figure out how to get beyond the fighting over old things and start to figure out, how you create a budget that people the confidence and? a budget that shows that we can get over our spending addiction,
a budget that shows that we can make some reasonable choices about how much money we're spending on health care, not to eliminated, but to get it under control. if we do not do that, the 11 implication on how well we can defend ourselves. and it is past time that that stops being a political issue and becomes a national security issue. having said that, my primary memory of september 11 is the bravery. at least that is what i choose to make it, of how brave those people were. and i remember the first good thought i had on september 11 was seeing the picture of the firefighters putting the flag out on top of the rubble and fire. and immediately what came to mind was iwo jima. book, qead tom brokaw's q the greatest generation." netbook ask the question, could
this generation handle what that generation was able to do? watching that picture, i said to myself, they are the sons and grandsons of the people who fought and won the second world war. it is not going to be any different. they are just as strong, they are just as powerful, they're just as much in love with america as their parents and grandparents were. and maybe it takes a time like this to bring that out. but that is there. this is the most exceptional country in the history of the world. what nation has ever fought wars for other people? empires are created like rome and england fighting wars to acquire territory for the empire. america has fought war to liberate and help other people. no nation in the history of the world has ever done that.
this is an exceptional country, we should love it, we should understand its failings and picks them but we should also understand that no human beings have ever done a better than americans in the 20th and 21st century. it is never been any different and we should be very grateful. thank you. [applause] >> thank you, mayor. >> you're welcome. >> we had a lot of questions, a lot of people, nice crowd for you and we're grateful for all that. let's start with a personal aside. someone asked the question, where did you personally find the strength to continue leading the city after 9/11? >> no one place. first of all, i do not think i
had a choice perdue was a question of, to light roldan ball and have people showing me on television like that? -- to i roll up into a ball and have people showing on television like that? it would of been embarrassing to show the mayor crying. or to adjust to the best that i can. he was and my father taught me very young in life, i have no idea why he taught this, if you ever ever in an emergency or fire, remain calm, because it's your best way of figuring your way out of it. and if you are not, pretend that you are. and it will help you the calm. i can remember that and i prayed a lot. i had no one biggest loss on september 11. but maybe the most jarring was father michael judge, because it was the first one. we have reestablished a command center at the police academy and someone in foreign aid that the
first person was discovered did, being carried out of the world trade center to st. peter's church, and it was father michael judge, the chaplain of the fire department. father michael judge was the person i was already thinking about that i would lean on to help me get through it. to help me explain it death to some many people. because he did it so many times for me with the fire department. when i lost him, i really felt alone. i felt almost like i felt when i left -- lost my father. i'm going have to grow up and do this myself. i guess you find the strength in the things that brought you up, the things -- and then i would go back and think about the other emergencies that i handled, and realized i knew how to do this. and when i went home last night, -- that night, i read a biography of churchill, because how did he handle something far worse than this, repeated attacks every single night.
i thought that was when happen, and gave me a great deal of strength to be able to see that, if someone else can go through that, i can go through. i wanted to say to the people of new york, the people of london went through this. you can go through it. >> a lot of questions about the face of terrorism today. one has to do with the ongoing threat from hawkeye that and then the shift this seems to occurred with even the present -- even before 9/11, the fear of homegrown terror. what is your thought about balancing those two and where you think we are with that? >> i think they're both equally dangerous threats. homegrown terrorists are more dangerous in some ways, because they are harder to detect. if something is being organized overseas, particularly in the areas where we have this tremendous military presence, which also means tremendous intelligence presence, the need
to communicate that across the world gives us a much better chance of finding in detecting that. stopping people from coming in, picking up messages. when it is done homegrown, it is much harder to detect. i was in london the day of the attack in london, the four bombings in london. i had to walk away from a liverpool station when the first bomb went off. that's why people were reluctant to invite me to parties and things like that. [laughter] and that was homegrown u.k. terrorists. i think that shocked even them and their intelligence services are about the best in the world. homegrown terrorism is a very dangerous thing, but most of them are still organized around islamic extremism and around their own desire to protest a paid in jihad, irresponsible and
insane even though it is. unfortunately, that is the area where you have to look for 95% of your terrorist. if you divert resources from that, you make a terrible mistake. >> what was your reaction to the death of osama bin laden and how have we manage the problem presented by pakistan? >> my reaction to the death of bin laden was relief and a tremendous amount of pride in the way in which the united states handled it. i thought president obama's finest moment, he handled it courageously, particularly having to make the decision to send the seal cent rather than engage in a bombing that would have left all kinds of questions about whether we really had hindered i thought his decision making about the burial as he was excellent. -- the burial at sea was excellent.
president bush paused policies held view of the information that led to that and that has to be acknowledged. and i think it will make the 10th anniversary somewhat easier. because when you bring someone to justice, there is something very elemental about the desire in human beings who been victimized the way that these people were victimized. and i think it will help. and i think it will help to stabilize and to construct a al qaeda. -- help destablize and deconstruct al qaeda. there are allies of ours in pakistan and there are enemies. pakistan is a nuclear power. so we have to be able to play a game with pakistan that is better than the game they're playing with us, which is to minimize the people that are taking advantage of us.
the problem that we have in afghanistan and pakistan, and i do not want to give political particularly, because i do not like doing that around september 11, if but i do not consider this political. i consider this important as sacred part of the problem we have in pakistan and afghanistan is the silly timetable that we put of mr. you cannot fight a war with a timetable. when did this idea of murder? who figured this out question no. this is the dumbest thing in the most dangerous thing you can possibly do. imagine if we had engaged in the civil war or the first world war or the second world war with a timetable? we will fly nazism for three years and they get tired and leave. we will be in afghanistan until the summer of 2010 or the summer of 2011. first of all, you cannot win a war that way. secondly, you give your enemy a tremendous blaring headline that we really are not serious. we really can wear them out. we can willie -- really wear
them down. finally, when you do that, you demoralize your troops and put them in a much greater danger. they realize the more pressure they are being put on, maybe that will speed up the withdrawal and we would change her mind. you fight a war for objective. objectives do not have time tables. what was the objective of the second world war -- defeat hitler. what is the objective in afghanistan? to make afghanistan say so that they stop plotting to kill us there. -- safe so that that, plotting to cause there. that could be six years from now. just like the cold war. we should remain in afghanistan, in iraq, and in that part of world until people in that part of the world, significant numbers of people, stop trying to figure out how to kill americans. [applause]
>> your referenced this in the beginning of your speech. mayor bloomberg decided that no religious leaders would participate in the ground zero ceremony on sunday. would you have come to the same decision? >> i respect mayor bloomberg very much and i appreciate what a good mayor he has been because i worked very hard to reform the new york city and i'll worried intensely my last year in office said that would be changed by another machine politician taking over and ruining the welfare reform program and hundreds of others. mary bloomberg has carried them on and improve them. -- mayor bloomberg has carried them on an improved them. but i will allow four religious leaders to say a little prayer since so many people wanted. at least i personally quickness talent for religious was in getting people to september 11, whether your religious yourself or you're not, it played a tremendous role.
having gone to some many masses, so many religious services, so many synagogues -- maybe a hundred? they did not know. -- i do not know. seeing how that offered some strength to move on, and it's a religion played a significant role in getting people through september 11, what you believe or do not believe, it is just the reality. it would be very simple to have a priest, minister, a rabbi, and a imam, the way that we had at the service that reorganized at yankee stadium -- and oprah winfrey, if i'm not mistaken with m? you get them up and they say a little prayer. the microphone will not melt to say a prayer. [laughter] the first amendment -- it does
not mean that you cannot say the word religion in a government building. we do not have to be hostile to religion. we just cannot establish one and require people to be a part of their religion. at the same time, we should not be at war with religion because it is evil and bad an awful, which is an excessive reaction they probably has marred the last 30 years of our country. >> you said you did not one of the political but i hope today that that has to do with i/11. we are in a political science and -- with 9/11. we are in the political season. the consensus is that you're not one to run for president. >> how do i know? i am part of a consensus. nobody asked me. >> well, i am asking. >> i did not know the answer that. i decided to put off as we get closer to september 11. but i tell you what i said before that.
i would very much like to see a change of direction in our country. i am a republican. how's the first republican elected mayor of new york city in 25 years, the first to remain a republican in 50. [laughter] i may be described as a moderate republican but i would ask people to read the "new york times"editorial about me and see how moderate i really was. i thought i govern economically as the most conservative mayor in that city. george will said i of was the most authentic conservative candidate because of my economic policies and my welfare policies, policies on crime, and security. and if i were to run, i would have a chance of winning the presidency, a chance. nobody ever knows. but i would have a hard time getting on there. i am a realist and i understand how the primary system works. paula like to say, if there is
someone that emerges that i think would be a strong candidates, if someone does not emerge that i -- is someone emerges that i think they can support, i would. my slogan for mayor of new york city is coming you cannot do any worse. bridget was, you cannot do any worse. [laughter] [applause] >> rick perry endorsed you in october 2007 in your bid for the nomination. would you like to return the favor? >> i like him very much. i told him that if he wants to avow his endorsement of may, he could. i was such a liberal, crazy, out of control republican.
i could see myself doing that, sure, but i do not know enough about what -- is going to say tomorrow night and the next two or three nights that the debate. i do not know what it romney is going to say. this is very strange election because we only had one debate, maybe two. we do not know all the positions that and how they can handle it. who looks like it would have the best chance of winning? the presidency. i would rather wait and see what happens there. but i do have a lot of admiration for rick. a campaign for him when irahe rn for governor against kay bailey hutchison. i think his record in texas is exactly the record we would need in the united states. but i am not sure he is the right candidate yet. there is a lot to that. at this point four years ago, i was the nominee. and i was running against
hillary clinton for you see how accurate those things are. >> which is said you cannot be nominated. what is it about the republican party that would prevent that from happening? >> i said it would be difficult to be nominated. we would have to be truly desperate. which, maybe we are, i do not know. >> about the party. >> is the organization of the primary system. it is a big party and has all kinds of facts and senate, far right, right, conservatives, moderates depends on where you are if you're running a primary like new hampshire. it is one thing they will be economic issues. if you run n/a caucus like iowa, is going to be social issues and still have enormous impact even if the net -- if the economic issues are important, they still forced a vote of many
people. the mistake i made last time was getting too focused on the idea of the national campaign. i would tell rick perry and governor romney not to worry some much about what those national polls are. i was at 34% -- national polls to not mean anything. winning iowa mean something. winning new hampshire mean something. winning south carolina mean something. those primaries are tilted very much in favor of conservative republicans who are very strongly conservative on social issues. and i am simply not a conservative on social issues and i am not willing to change just to become president. >> i want to follow with some of the lighter side of what people when asked about, but briefly, can conservatives when the win thete 0--
electorate? >> it will be based on the economy. i think it space the next i will be important. it is his last chance to be moderate. it is a last chance to do a bill clinton. which is what he has to do if he wants to be reelected. but if he remains tied to extremely unrealistic ideas about our economy, and those under realistic ideas are borne out by the poor performance of our economy, it does not matter if someone is right wing, medal win, or no wind, they are going to be him because the american people will say, let's give something else a chance, this is not working. right now of the election took place, i believe the president would lose to anyone of those top two or three republicans that are running. they would lose because the
american people are fed up because -- fed up with a result. it would take a chance of something else. if peace does not show improvement in the economy, then it will not matter that much. if there is improvement in the economy and he pulls the clinton in that sense, and i mean that a right way, in the sense of trying to govern in the middle -- i did not mean it is a disparity. for the last couple of years, having been a critic of president clinton, i have been say to myself, i want you back. [laughter] you're not so bad. the reformed welfare and you put on hundred thousand cops out on the street and you understood how a compromise with us. -- how to compromise with us. and this is really been a disaster. i did not want to get too political. [laughter] >> we took care of that. we appreciate that very one of
our traditional housekeeping matters year as a gesture are things before we get to the final question, i would like to present you with a true token of our appreciation, the national press club coffee mug. and here is our final question, the political season is heating up. but there is another season, baseball, and you bought yankees world series rings. water the chances you'll have another opportunity to do that after this season? >> here is my lucky yankee bracelet. i wore in boston when we beat the red sox. i think the yankees have gotten very hot at exactly the right time. just like football, the team that wins the super bowl tends to get hot in december and january. the yankees have all of a sudden started to hit the way they are capable of. if you look at their batting averages, they're fabulous.
since the all-star break, one is betting .330. a-rod is back. and they just brought up our rookie to beat the orioles is today. i am more about the red sox, always am very i am worried about rangers. and i am worried about the philadelphia phillies, what a pitching staff. but i think the yankees will be in the world series and that they are in it, they will find a way to win. >> how about around of applause for our guests. thank you very much. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> i like to thank all of you for coming here today and thank our national press club staff including our library and broadcast center for organizing today's event brief all like to thank our guest speaker. you can find out more about the
national press club at our website, www.press.org. you can get copy of today's program there. thank you very much and we are adjourned. >> this weekend, the 10th anniversary of 9/11 on the c- span networks with live coverage from each of the memorial sites, new york city, shanks though, pa., and the pentagon. here is our lives it appeared saturday on c-span at 12:30 p.m. eastern, the flight 93 national memorial dedication ceremony for saxo, pennsylvania. sunday morning at 8:30 a.m., a memorial ceremony from the world trade center site with president obama and former president bush. on c-span2 at 9:00 a.m., vice president biden from the pentagon. on c-span3 at 9:30 a.m.,
honoring those that lost their lives on united flight 93. 9/11 remember this weekend on the c-span networks. >> in a few moments, the head of the transportation security administration on aviation security tenure as after the 911 attacks. in a little less than an hour our republican candidate mitt romney allies his plan to create jobs and another job proposal later from nancy pelosi. >> a couple of live events to tell you about coming up tomorrow morning for the center for strategic and international studies hosts an all-day forum on intelligence and the terrorist threat. the event begins with remarks by homeland security secretary janet napolitano at 8:00 eastern on c-span 3. here on c-span, this city -- the senate foreign relations committee considers the nomination of windy sherman to
be undersecretary of state for political affairs. >> in 1844, henry clay ran for president of the united states and lost. and the changed political history. he is one of the 14 men featured in c-span's new weekly series, q q the contenders became friday at 8:00 eastern. >> the head of the transportation security administration, john pistole, spoke today about aviation security since 9/11 and how the tsca looks for suspicious behavior in airline passengers. this is a little less than an hour. >> good morning. i'm the director of the
homeland's security programs. the center for strategic and international studies. thank you for braving the first day of school and the bad weather for this hectic week. we are honored to have john pistole to speak. tsa has been the center and the focal point of discussions about what the appropriate role is for homeland's security and transportation security. we know tsa, we relate to them to individuals who do the screenings at the airport. unfortunately, that is not the only thing they do. their portfolio is much broader and deeper than that. the advances they have made over the years despite the criticisms and the media wanted to focus on where they went wrong, the
advances they have made are quite remarkable. when of the things going forward in the threat we're facing, we will see this increase of transnational threats that will cross our borders, this continued struggle between the balance of privacy and security. tsa is at the forefront of that debate. every day there are officers in the field who have to deal with that balance between privacy and security. it is going to get more difficult going forward. you do not get a lot of pats on the back. nobody says, nice job. you only get criticized when something goes wrong. to manage an organization like that, when you do not a lot of praise when you get right,
requires a significant level of leadership. that is where the administrator comes in. he has been a lifelong and, nearly 30 years of government service. he was at the fbi during 9/11. he brings leadership and integrity to organization like tsa. for today, i would like to introduce mr. pistole. he is going to give 30 minutes of remarks and then we will have questions and answers. we appreciate and the microphone comes along to please state your affiliation. will forward to his remarks. crescive for attending. >> good morning. thank you for that introduction. it is a privilege to be here. i appreciate the opportunity to focus on some of the issues that we are dealing with today. 's use this time to reflect,
look back on where we were on 9/11 and where we have come in the past decade. what we're doing today and as we look forward to the next 10 years. that is how my comments will be focused this morning. we obviously have had the opportunity this last weekend as we, on the 10th anniversary to see a lot of coverage about where people were, what was going on, how lives were changed and lost, and number of you watched some of those over the weekend. as we look forward to how we can do the best possible job of making sure that a tragedy such as 9/11 does not happen again, we have to be mindful of where we have come. so i would like to dedicate these comments to the victims of
9/11 common to these heroes who, knowing the dangers they face, the firefighters, first responders, who went into the trade center towers to rescue those who were at peril. i would ask we take a moment of silence and remember them. as we see some of these memorials, attributes and things, it brings it all back. just as it was one of those defining events for certain generation, similar to pearl harbor where the jfk assassination, order that the defining event has been for you, it is easy to think of what
you're doing, where you were, and how you responded. that you have that opportunity. as you think about this coming sunday and the 10th anniversary, i think the context is important for where we have been and where we're trying to get to. i was an fbi agent. i was assigned to our inspection division. i was in new york state in syracuse to do an inspection of the office there. i had just completed an interview with a local media outlet and had arrived at a local judge's office to interview him on how the office was doing. when i got to the office, the tv's ron and there was talking, coverage of the north tower being a in flames and people trying to figure out what had happened. shortly thereafter we realized
something was terribly wrong. i excused myself and went back to the fbi office. it was there that i watched, along with many of you, on tv to see the second plane hit the south tower. just a sense of it being surreal. this cannot be happening. but was happening. i think the real impact was when the first tower collapsed. two things came to mind -- this changes everything and, what is next? what is next played out over the next minutes as we learn about the plane hitting the pentagon. from an fbi perspective, what else is out there?
what can we do immediately to stop anything further? are there other attacks the plant? all those things. when we look and what happened, we looked at the state of security. i have seen some commentators wax nostalgic for the days prior to 9/11 when you could meet your friends and loved ones at the gate or whatever it may be. no lines and things like that. that was a different europe. if you think to what type of security we have then, it was basically a metal detector. it picked up metal items, knives, guns. cuba is the reason there were
initiated in decades ago. and the basic x-ray for your carry-on bag. a streamlined process. as we know from the photograph from the portland, maine, airport on 9/11 at 5:45 that morning when mohamed atta walked through the portland security with their box cutters and were able to get on the flight to go to boston where they joined up with three other hijackers on american airlines flight 11, the airport security at that time was limited, it was basic, and it was insufficient. the response to the attacks, obviously, was for a number of things to happen, but in regards to tsa on invest 19th, congress passed a bill and the president signed a bill creating the transportation security administration, at that time part of the department of transportation.
and so when we look at what the mandate was to the entire u.s. defense community, intelligence, law enforcement, security apparatus, the president's mandate was don't let this happen again. and so over the course of the next year, tsa ramped up from zero to nearly 50,000 employees. it is one of the greatest mass hirings, if you will, in u.s. history in terms of a response to an event such as 9/11. and what has happened since then is a refinement in some respects, an expansion in other respects of where aviation security has focused. as ozzy mentioned, obviously, tsa other responsibilities primarily as a force multiplier to state and local agencies and amtrak, for example. so i won't comment on that at this point, but be glad to take your questions on that. that's where we were on 9/11. since then, obviously, much has
changed, and the president's mandate at that time and continuing, obviously, in this administration is to not let that happen again. it's held true. the challenge has become, as terrorists have evolved, how have we involved, and have we been able to stay at least a step ahead of them in terms of their ingenuity, their creativity, their ability to adapt and divine, conceal and deploy improvised devices whether as we saw on richard reid or the liquids plot out of u.k. in august of '06 or as we saw on christmas day and, of course, the human cargo plot last year, last october where the terrorists see what layers of security we have put in place modify their approach to try to insure that they can get past our security.
of course, the latest intelligence now is about surgically-implanted devices that suicide bombers would have so they would not be -- so we would not be able to detect the small devices such as on christmas day, 2009. we believe we had been successful in pushing them to further extremes in terms of their concealment and their capabilities, mindful that we need to insure that we don't allow a repeat of a prior attack. so let's just look at some of the things that we have done collectively since 9/11 when it comes to aviation security. if i asked each of you to write down some of those things, a number of things that i'm sure come to mind. most notably would be the the checkpoint that you must go through at one of the u.s.' 450 airports or, of course, around the world. nearly 275 last points of departure that fly directly to the u.s.
there's a certain protocols regimen that you have to go through which have become symbolic of the government's response to 9/11. and with 1.8 million people every day traveling domestically, 12.5 million a week, 50 million plus a month or 625 million people every year and going up this year, you can see the challenge that the men and women of tsa have to insure they provide the most effective security in the most efficient way, providing the best customer service, if you will, but not at the expense of security. the bottom line is we have to make sure we're doing everything we can while respecting privacy and civil liberties. a lot of debate about that as to insuring that another 9/11 doesn't happen. so think of the checkpoint and think of what happens there now instead of just a walk-through metal detector. that's still available, but there's also advanced imaging technology, and i'm very
pleased that we, that technology has developed, and we are modifying at least half of those scanners to what we call automatic target recognition that just gives a generic outline of a person. and so in the next 30 days or so we should have half of all of those machines, 450 or so, around the country modified so it just gives that generic outline of a person, and so it does not do that more revealing individual image. contrary to what has been in the press quite a bit, at least the things i saw and were, of course, parodied on shows, not nearly as revealing as what was depicted often times. but the fact of the matter is there are privacy issues there that we are trying to be attuned to while making sure we provide the best detection capability and so an abdulmutallab who is, perhaps, inspired by some terrorist group and has gone on
the internet, learned how to devise a device similar to that that is nonmetallic, that that type of device will be picked up by the advanced imaging technology. that's one of the noticeable obviously, we have an explosive trace detection capability. so some of you have traveled, you may have your hands swabbed whether you're in line or if you alarm somehow, just have your hands swabbed for explosive trace detection. that's something we, of course, did not have. we have advanced x-ray technology for the bags and a number of different iterations of that. but the bottom line is as passengers pack more of their personal items in their carry- on bags so they don't have to pay a checked bag fee -- i'm sure none of you have done that here -- but as people do that, it makes detection, frankly, more difficult for the security officers who are looking at the screen. and if any of you have not had an opportunity or have done
that, i would just -- to see what these items look like, i would just ask that you be patient with those security officers who are looking because it is very challenging to look for an organic mass and an initiator. so the two things that we're looking for in terms of an improvised explosive device, and there's many things that look like either an initiator or an organic mass. so the challenge is how do we resolve those issues, those anomalies, if you will, in a timely way that provides, again, the most effective security but in the most efficient way. so we have the advanced technology x-ray. we have bottle liquid scanners. we are working on technology to get to the point where we can allow liquids to come back on planes, but we're not there. we've been working closely with the european union in terms of -- and the european parliament's mandates to allow liquids back on planes by april 2013.
the technology's not there yet, but we're working on that and also some other risk-based security initiatives which i'll talk about in just a few minutes. and so that's what's happening at the checkpoint. what is not, what you do not see, hopefully -- because unless you're down in the cargo area -- is the inline baggage systems that we have worked with industry to develop a high- speed process for screening of explosives, screening of checked bags for explosives. happen. obviously, pre-9/11 that didn't now, pan-am 103 did change the procedures for matching the person to the bag on international flights, but it did not require, no legislation was enacted to require that those bags then be screened for explosives. so that's been a major development and a change, again, you probably don't see, you shouldn't see in most instances.
but we have millions of bags that we screen every day, um, and both from the checked bags and the carry-on bags to look for those explosives that could be catastrophic to the aircraft. out there. so that's something else that is and, also, behavior detection officers. they didn't exist on 9/11. the question is, be if they'd been in portland, maine, or boston or dulles or newark, would they have picked up on these individuals? hopefully so, but that's something we'll never know. the idea is to give us yet another opportunity in a layered defense to identify, deter and disrupt terrorists who are bent on causing destruction. so how do we best go about doing that? it is through those layers of defenses that we have. that's all on the physical side of things. where we are making significant progress is also on the technology intelligence side of things, and secure flight is, of course, our system that just
requires the name, date of birth and gender of all travelers, all those 1.8 million people every day and allows us to, again, do some definitive checking against the terrorist watch list. of course, terrorist watch lists prior to 9/11 were limited at best, and the idea of being able to check with any confidence or any level of accuracy was quite limited, frankly, prior to last year, about now, last october actually, full rollout of secure flight. previously, airlines maintained lists, and so we would not know, for example, if there were a half dozen selectees or even some no-flies who were wanting to travel. if they were on different airlines, we would not know that information perhaps until the last minute, if at all. so the advent of secure flight was just recognized by the 9/11 commission as being one of the good technology developments,
and we use that from an intelligence-based perspective to say we want to be a counterterrorism, risk of-based, intelligence-driven organization that is informed by intelligence from the community, and this is one of those key enablers that allows us to do that. the other part i'll just touch on briefly is in cargo. and, again, going back to pan- am 103, and we see what can happen with cargo that is not thoroughly screened. we see what happened with the yemen cargo plot from last october when there is some screening, but because of the ability for terrorists, al- qaeda in the arabian peninsula in particular to design and conceal those in such a way that even upon inspection they look like normal computer printers. and so that is a challenge. but when we look at cargo, i don't think, um, people realize that there is, there are million of pounds of cargo that fly in u.s. passenger planes every day.
over nine and a half million pounds of cargo go on u.s. passenger planes. so all that cargo is also screened for explosives and, um, and that's done through a partnership with the private sector. but the bottom line is tsa has that responsibility. again, that's something you don't see, but it's another layer of security that we're trying to ensure that you and your loved ones are safe, even if it's cargo, checked bags or anything else a person may have on them. now, that nine and a half million pounds, that's just a little more than 10% of all the cargo that is screened and uplifted in the u.s. every day both domestic and overseas locations. so it's not an insignificant amount, and it is something that is required for us to give the high level of confidence that we are doing everything we can with the best training, techniques and tactics enabled by the best technology to provide that highest level of
security, recognizing that as we move forward this is no guarantees in this business. so let me transition from where we were on 9/11 to what we've been doing the last ten years to the way forward and whether it's the next ten days, weeks, months or years, there's a lot of work that is being done to try to provide that most effective security in the most efficient way. and the one part of that is recognizing that in order to give a 100% guarantee of safety and security for each and every passenger flight and cargo flight would require a paradigm shift of what we're doing now to even more stringent security measures both with passengers and with cargo which would, frankly, inhibit the free movement of goods and people with the best security in significant ways. and we saw that after the yemen
cargo plot. we had meetings, i met with the head of the world customs organization, the head of the universal postal union who, of course, is affected anytime cargo is. the international cargo association and the maritime association to work with them to find a business-based model that would provide the most effective security without unduly chain. restricting the global supply because that's what's happened when we put an immediate cargo ban hold on anything coming out of yemen. the ripple effect, the impact of that was significant. and so in working with industry, we have been heartened by industry's own risk mitigation, risk management strategies, particularly here in the u.s., to buy down that risk of somebody putting something in cargo that could cause catastrophic failure, um, and they're doing that without government regulation. so they are taking their own
risk mitigation, risk management steps, again, recognizing that they are not in the risk elimination business just as we are not in the risk elimination business. we do what we can. it is within that constructs that we have been working on risc based security initiatives. that encompasses a number of things. some of which you have heard about and some we have not talked about yet but we will later this fall or next year. some of the ones that are known are identity based screenings for pilots. those in charge of the aircraft. i worked the egypt crash was -- when i was with the fbi or we did a salvage operation with the navy and others trying to find evidence what brought down that crash. it was not until later we realized that it was not because of catastrophic failure but
because of an individual on board who got control of the co- pilot and put the aircraft down. that was a stark reminder that no amount of physical screening is going to detectives in the persons had. so it made little sense to me that we should require pilots to go through screenings when, if they had a prohibited item, a knife for weber, -- or whatever, it will be in their mind. that is one example. if we are working with industry, the airlines, the airports, and the travel associations to have a known, a trusted traveler expansion of what customs protection does with their century and networks.
people pay a fee, go through application process, have a background down. we have a higher level in confidence of those people are. we know about them. not a guarantee but we know more about them. that is critical because under this initiative, the whole idea is to focus on those we know the least about or the most about because fehr on a watch list. then be able to focus our resources on those individuals and enable us to do that. we need to have intelligence screenings and then we can expedite those who know a lot about. there is a number of you in the audience who have a security clearance. the question is, we know a lot about you. you're in a trusted position. should you go through the same type of screening? that is one example.
it gives us an opportunity, with all our other layers of security, to try to make some advances in that regard. working with the airline, we are hoping next month to do some proof of concepts in four airports with frequent-flier at higher levels who are willing to share in formation about themselves through their airlines to say, yes, i'm willing to share that i am a frequent flier. as we look at travel histories, we will be able to make more informed judgments as to what a risk to this person poses. if you've been flying for 30 years and you're at this level, from those years, it is possible your a terrorist but it is not likely. as we can use more intelligence
to shape and inform our decisions, i think we can make a better process. were also looking at ways can streamline the situation with children. we know people use children to do bad things. we have several examples of children 10 and under, nothing involving aviation, but we're mindful that terrorists are looking to exploit societal norms to try to cause us harm. a number of different ways we're looking at this initiative. the bottom line is to use more intelligence on the front-end. so we can embed information on the boarding pass and allow us to focus in that way. there is also talk about a checkpoint in the future.
international air travel association. i have been a strong proponent of that. the technology is not there but the idea that you could walk through a security scanner which would pick up explosives or anything else and they because catastrophic failure, that is a great idea. that is something that has been explored. so all of these opportunities we had to shift to the paradigm to try to tailor the security screening involving intelligence, physical screenings, random and unpredictable because we will always maintain that. there will be no guarantees in this initiative. i refuse to allow terrorists to game the system and say a fight
build this legend of travel and i'm guaranteed an expedited screening. we will always maintain that random aspect of it to ensure we're doing the best possible job. without, and thank you for your time and attention. i look forward to your questions and comments. [applause] >> i think one of his greatest achievements, considering today's political climate, was the fact that he was confirmed by unanimous consent in the senate. that is a testament to the kind of lever that -- leader that tsa has. please wait for the microphone because we have the media. state your name and affiliation
and the question. no statements. we will ask you to sit down. >> thank you. fox news channel. with respect to the christmas day bomber, is it accurate to say that we were lucky that the explosives did not ignite because his pants were damp? is it fair to say that we get lucky that more of these plots do not succeed? >> there are a number of unknowns. we were fortunate on christmas day. the question i look back at is what have our layers of security done to force terrorists to adopted different means of concealment. whether there was something in the design, construction, or the fact that yet been traveling for
17 hours, there are a lot of unknowns. the bottom line is if it had detonated as intended, it would have caused a catastrophic failure to the aircraft. >> the gentleman over here. >> i am from the institute for defense analysis. you made allusion to inbound flights from other countries into here. would not a risk-based system put more -- far more resources on inbound flights? >> part of our challenge is how we assure confidence that our international partners are doing requisite screening to our level. we work closely with our counterparts and with the security services, the law
enforcement agencies, and the government's, and the airlines o ensure they are doing the requisite baseline security. as we informed through information sharing, we look at those opportunities. this initiative we're working on is designed to start domestically to make sure we can get it right here and then we have been in dialogue with a number of foreign governments and private industry who are interested in how this works and for us expanding that to flights that would be impacted internationally. we are focused first domestically.
>> the gentleman over here in the blue suit. >> you talked a little bit about cargo on passenger carrying aircraft. is all cargo on inbound aircraft being screened, recognizing that screening is more than x-rays? >> 100% of all high-risk cargo is being screened in damage to the u.s. we do not define that publicly because we do not want to provide a road map to the terrorists. but it falls within two constructs. known shippers and known shipments. if there is an existing relationship with the shipper and that has been existing for long time, and we know the products they ship, that is one
aspect. if it is not in that category, is today known shipments tha? the young woman dropped off to computer printers with clothes and books and was paying $500 to send those packages by different aircrafts' to chicago. that did not make much sense from a risk basic security perspective. that type of information advanced -- it is helpful in defining who is 80 norn shipper. that is the general constructs. . >> the gentleman in the blue shirt. >> a private citizen. the question on the rbs, it seems like you're talking a lot
profiling without saying a word? houri going to socialize the american people to except that? are we taking any of the israeli air lines lasses learned? >> is the men and women who are working to keep you and your loved one safe. what we are trying to do is deliver in terms of how we can do this in an interactive process. i mentioned the problem -- pilots. we also have worked with the world war ii veterans who come into d.c. to see memorials on charter flights. to work with them to do more identity screenings as opposed to the physical screening. there is a chance to one of these elderly gentleman, the
youngest and is as light 80's is a terrorist. it is not likely. harken oil of more common sense and the policies we use -- how can we have more common sense in the policies we use? if the groups are such a small group it does not make much difference to the people travelling every day. what we are working with through the airlines is saying if it is all voluntary, if you do not want to share information, that is fine. but if you like the possibility of expedited screenings and you are willing to share information, we are interested in that and how we can use that in a constructive way to do the best possible security.
>> right here in the back. the microphone is coming around. >> thank you. mr. pistole, what is your vision regarding the future of this process? you know that many people are upset about the extensive process that goes on. what do you foresee we could evolves into with respect to our endgame in terms of going through this process? >> could you state your name? >> georgetown. >> the whole idea, we're looking at the one in a billion. we have had nearly 6 billion people travel in the u.s. that
tsa screens. we did not start screening until 2002. there have been no shoe bombs. from a probability standpoint, that is something we're interested in. what does intelligence tells us? even though the european union has that many people travelling, it is using intelligence in an informed way. i do not think it is reasonable for anybody to say there is a two-year plan, three-year plan, this is it what is going to look like. we are always evolving. hopefully ahead of the terrorists as they evolve but the general approach is to provide more intelligence on the front and to expedite the fiscal screening.
so we reduce the size of that haystacks of the needle is smaller than what we started with under our previous contract. -- construct. >> to go back to be trusted as travel experience, you have a sense of what that expedited screening is? i know there's going to be randomness but for global entry, you get a specific benefit. you go to a kiosk. can we expect, maybe we do not have to take off our shoes. what is your thoughts on the average traveler? >> what we were doing in the proof of concept is three things -- a dedicated line for them. you do keep your shoes on.
and you can keep your laptop in your briefcase or carrying case. those are the three tangible benefits we are looking at. again, you may and upper -- end up, he may have gone through that dedicated lane, the 10th time you may go through regular screening. random and unpredictable. >> right here in the middle. black dress. >> can you comment as to whether the budget cuts would affect tsa, especially when it comes to personnel? >> we are very mindful that we work for taxpayers. there is of focus on how every government agency can be more efficient. the bottom line is, i have to
look at a 60,000 person organization and say how can we achieve efficiency in a way that does not adversely affect security tax for the last six months we have been going through a series of reviews, the eternal -- internal reviews to identify some areas we can be more efficient while not negatively impacting security. >> i'm going to jump in here with a question. we talk a lot about, and tsa interacting with the general population dropped the transportation system. a lot of assets of tsa. one -- what do you need from the american people? what can they do? >> at the risk of misquoting the
president in a different way, jefferson talked about an informed electorate, for us, a well-informed traveler is the best defense against a terrorist. it is somebody who knows how to prepare for screening. they will be attuned to things that do not seem right. if you see something, say something. it is for those who recognize when somebody is not doing what they should do. it is that a partnership that is critical. the patient with us as we roll out some of these security initiatives that will need time to make sure we get it right. we may need to recalibrate. we're doing a behavior assessments at boston logan.
some of the may have been through that. i would ask for patience and cooperation. the bottom line is to make sure another 9/11 does not happen or something else where they come up with a creative scheme that has not yet been identified. >> another question from the audience. the front row. >> paul ryan. in your opening remarks, you mentioned amtrak. if you think about the european terrorist bombings, they seem to be trained or the subway oriented. if you go to union station you see some dogs. if you get on a train, you buy your ticket at a kiosk. there is no inspection. are we taking enough action or
is the train transportation system a soft underbelly? >> a couple of points. the focus of today is aviation security. clearly, terrorists see some ways, passenger trains, -- subways, passenger trains as vulnerable. when of the things we do is recognize it cannot be all things to all people. but we leverage our resources in a smart way to augment to the amtrak police or the transit authorities. if you look at the ryder ship, -- ridership, 8 million plus every day. that is where the random and unpredictable comes in.
amtrak has a great job of uniformed patrols. random searches. things designed to throw off terrorists. we know that the three things that they focus on as a deterrent are uniformed officers, canines, and cctv. obviously they left the packages and got out. the seven-seven bombers and london, one of them looked at cctv because he did not care. in 10 minutes he was going to be dead. those are the things, we have teams decide to do that. but recognizing that there are challenges that are significant every day. it is true that partnership with
the american people, there is a metro transit chief who does critter steps. the sea something, say something campaign. like a 10 foot backpack. it will not always be this obvious. the idea that, or a huge package like a fedex package. it will not be that obvious. what can we do in terms of being informed and responsive? >> next question. the woman in the back, please. >> good morning. um, thank you for assuring all of these measures tsa has implemented. are we safer?
i traveled regularly and to be perfectly honest, i get shavers and liquids through regularly. >> the bottom line is, yes, the consensus is, and i believe that we are safer today than we were. we recognize it is not a perfect system. it is not a guarantee. both the accountability office, the inspector general office, does covert testing to try to get things through a checkpoint and have had successes. a number of successes. that, coupled with intelligence about how terrorists are trying to conceal devices, that presents challenges or we say let's make sure we're looking at those items that can be catastrophic to an aircraft.
that is why i mentioned the organic nasa and the initiator of an ied. those are what we're looking for. you have to have something, some type of explosive, hopefully you have a pint or leader bottle. -- liter bottle. how do we best position our resources to identify those threats which may be catastrophic? >> any other questions? anyone else? going once, going twice, thank you once again. i know this is a busy week for you. we appreciate your time in leadership at the tsa. thank you for coming to csis. [applause]
memorial dedication ceremony. sunday morning, a memorial ceremony from the world trade center site with president obama and former president bush. on c-span to a 9:00, vice president lighted from the pentagon. -- biden from the pentagon. 9/11 remembered. this weekend on c-span. >> gop presidential candidate mitt romney outlines his plan to create jobs. in 45 minutes, democrats are for their jobs plan. then a look ahead to the 10th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks with janet the poet, -- m napolitano. on "washington journal, "and focus on jobs, the economy, and a speech to congress with karen
kerrigan. doctor francis collins, director of the national institute of health, take your questions about innovations and madison. we will be joined by a business writer roger lowenstein who wrote about stop backing the u.s. decision with golden, affects the economy today. live on c-span every day at 7:00 a.m. eastern. once more video of the candidates. see what reporters are saying and track the latest contributions with c-span's website. easy-to-use, it helps you navigate the political landscape with twister -- twitter feeds, plus links to c-span media partners. all at c-span.org/campaign2012.
mitt romney told an audience today that if elected his plan to create jobs and spur the economy would include reducing corporate taxes and cutting the federal budget by $20 billion. this 45 minute event starts with comments from a nevada representative. [applause] >> thank you for being here this morning. many of you may have heard news today of a tragedy in carson city. this morning, a lone gunman opened fire in a restaurant, wounding and killing a number of nevadans. we just learned wetwo of them --
we learned that two of them were active national guard members. our thoughts and prayers are with the victims, their families, and friends. i ask that we take a moment. if you would join me in a moment of remembrance for those members and their families. thank you. well, welcome, and thanks for coming today. it is heartening to see such a great crowd turned out and what a great honor it is that governor mitt romney back in the nevada. it is fitting that governor
romney has chosen nevada to discuss his jobs plan, a state that has been hurt like no other from policies that stifle entrepreneurship, investment, and job creation. it is exciting that the governor is here today to provide his vision for a more prosperous america. [applause] today we visit a facility created because john mccandless believed in himself and believed in his country. he drove to nevada with a willingness to bet on himself. he worked hard, earning and saving enough money to take a chance. today that chance employs more than 100 people. like any good business owner -- [applause]
john and his sons have had to make difficult decisions. recently, at 82 years old, john decided to continue working every day, reducing his own paycheck so that others could keep their jobs, and he had to comply with new and often unnecessary federal regulations. as government has become a larger and larger part of every business owners life. it is an honor to be here at a facility built for hard work, dedication, determination, and pride, and is an honor to educe to you the founder of mccandless international trucks, john mccandless. [applause] >> [inaudible]
a child of the depression, i have worked since i was 7 years old call. i lived in long island. i dug worms and sold them to fisherman at 2 cents apiece. i used to pick up bottles, beer bottles, usually. people would throw them out the windows of their cars, and i would get a nickel apiece, and a nickel would build -- would buy you a double-dipped ice cream cone. i worked in a service station. i was made manager at the age of 13. it was hard for the owner of the fine anybody better than i because of world war ii.
i got married in california. i picked peaches. i worked on a harvester. then i went to a junior college there -- before that i joined the navy, and that enabled me to go to college. [applause] in the navy i was an aviation electronics technician. i spent two years in the navy. i got out of the navy, went to college on the gi bill, played football, had a football scholarship, and then all of a sudden i graduated and i thought, what am i going to do? i did it. i went to work for shell oil co. because they tried to make a clerical worker out of me, and i did not stand for that. if you saw my desk, you would know why.
anyhow i told the shell oil people i did not like their job, and they said, work for six more weeks in the morning and find the afternoon to find a job. the next afternoon i found a job with international harvester co., and i went through the ranks there, trainee, manager, branch manager in phoenix. then from phoenix i came to las vegas, with a u-haul trailer and a formula driver traveled. i found a warehouse, made that my dealership for your walleyed build the new one. international would be the money to become a dealer. so it was at that location, i
think for 20 years, and then we moved here in 1994, added 8 to, i still good work every day, and my wife has convinced me i do not have to come in on saturdays anymore. she wants me to retire, and i keep telling her that it is twice as much husband and half the income. despite the rough economy, i have not had any massive layoffs here. i have laid off four people, and it was not a lay off. they were not doing the job. my service manager found jobs for the four people, so i did not feel guilty about that. i still believe in the american worker. i got through to jimmy carter e ra and was so happy when ronald reagan made me