tv U.S. House of Representatives CSPAN May 4, 2012 9:00am-2:00pm EDT
if you look at the internet, you will see that the two leaders in the navy shaking hands. can that possibly be like a compliment to our government saying," wait a second, two governments contradicting each other have worked together back in the 1990's?" maybe this is a complement to the united states.
guest: cooperation between two countries is good. mill to mill relationships which we have lots of countries including countries that are not our closest friends, we used to have these relationships with pakistan and we stopped at our peril in our relationship with pakistan and that has declined as you are well aware relationships, especially like economic dialogue like hillary clinton and secretary of the treasury tim geithner had in beijing are very good things. what we should watch and a dangerous time his cooperative relationships where we will have competition like china and russia.
that is what we should try to achieve. if we were doing and in the late 1990's, that is a good thing. host: this question is from twitter - guest: first of all, i don't call it the arabis spring. -- the arab spring. i called the arab awakening. the organizing events is the birth of the arab citizen. think about that. citizens of mellon fell other officials have not done well in egypt yes. it is an important way to think about this. should any countries be exempt? absolutely not.
some of the countries have already lost their leaders. it was a bottom of the uprising by their citizens. the monarchies have kept their leaders but have been forced to open up to some extent especially morocco and jordan. both of those were reasonably modern countries. saudi arabia is not exempt. bahrain is not exempt. there have been changes. i think there need to be more changes. host: dallas, texas, good morning. caller: i remember that you were a big cheerleader on behalf of the vision -- of the invasion of iraq. i googled your voting record and you come across in some ways as a waysneo-con in terms of military intervention. can you speak to that? guest: i am certainly not a neocon.
i have been called a scoop jackson democrat. he was a very long term senator from washington state who had strong views on defense and economics and very progressive views on social issues. i fit in that part of the democratic spectrum. the democratic party, after vietnam, which was a serious car across our country, split into two wings. i am more in the scoop jackson wing. on the invasion of iraq, all i did support the resolution. the reason i did is i believe to the intelligence. i studied it carefully. the intelligence turned out to be wrong and i have said, looking back on that vote, that that was the wrong code based on wrong information. host: the debate about the incarceration debatejose padilla
is back in the newspapers about his incarceration today. do we have a policy that is workable when american citizens are suspected of being involved in possibly terrorist activities? >> let's talk about the decision first. i think the ninth circuit decided correctly. i think we have to give immunity to government officials. in this case thisjohn yu, i think is legal opinions or wrong, he deserved immunity.
on the other hand, i think we should have had much greater oversight over these activities. in my position on the intelligence committee, demanded to see the legal memos and never got them and as i told an earlier caller, i have no ability when briefed on the terrorist surveillance program to talk to anybody about the legal basis of that program. i was assured it was legal but what i didn't know was it was based on a new legal structure set up by lawyers like john yu, non on bill law that congress pass. there should be much more oversight by congress of all activities of the executive branch, some better properly classified deserve oversight in the classified section. the caller is right or you are right that there needs to be more exposure of this stuff but not through a lawsuit against a
government official who was exercising his officials duties when he wrote a legal memo. host: saint petersburg, florida, good morning. caller: michael pertains to your foreign policy and the cost of our foreign policy. -- my call pertains to your foreign-policy and the cost of our foreign policy directi. when admiral wollen left his position from the joint chiefs of staff, he said the threat to our national security laws are dead and i would think admiral small and would have a handle on our national security. he said the threat was our debt and you also mentioned that we have a responsibility for our
national security. can we do this national security without so many boots on the ground? guest: generally, the answer to that is yes. i said earlier on this program that what we need to do is win the argument. military might alone will not win the argument. with the next generation of would-be terrorists. i think smaller military footprints in afghanistan would be more productive and i applaud the fact that we are not only removing most of our troops by 2014 but we are changing our strategy. to that extent, i agree with you. a lot of the future is unknown. there is now a new defense doctrine that will cost less money that has been proposed by
defense secretary panetta which basically says instead of having ground forces and other assets to fight major regional contingencies, mrc's which means they wars, we will only have enough for one big four and the rest of our focus will be more on counter-terrorism activities our that we will pettitpivot focus to asiathere are many more opportunities for increased cooperation, many things to consider over the longer-term, like the fact that china is increasing its military budget by 11%. that must mean something. we are headed in a better direction. i think smaller military footprints on the ground and a bigger investment in ct is the way to go. the biggest investment should
be in the policy and development--in diplomacy and development. bob gates, leon panetta's predecessor, urged that more money should go to the state department budget. i personally agree that that focus should go into more activities handled by the state department. host: a popular statement from victoria newland at the state department. "the chinese government stated today that mr. chen guangcheng has the recession right to travel abroad as any other citizen of china.
guest: well, earlier in this broadcast, we talked about this. the visa to study in the united states sounded like a plan that might be accepted by both sides. if this means he and his family are leading--are leaving soon, and that his safety is assured until he leaves, i do not know any more details than what you just read, but it sounds like that is headed in the right direction. what is important is, remember, china is changing. maybe this is evidence that china is changing. our goal has to be to increase the opportunity for china to change rather than just slam china against the wall. and a lot of the rhetoric yesterday was overheated. i understand this is a presidential election year, but our goal is to protect the safety of this man, to celebrate
the fact that he has been a courageous human rights activists, and hopefully to work with china on some issues that are extremely serious, including some currency issues with china and trade issues. but right now, to me, other urgent issues to work on with china are to get north korea to stop destabilizing missile and possibly nuclear tests, and to have a coordinated tragedy--to have a coordinated strategy to stop it ran from going there, and for china and russia to change the government in syria. host: boston, our last caller, a democrat there. caller: thanks. her support of israel probably writes does her h not extend to the palestinians.
guest: thank you. you have every right to that view, but to push back a little, as a member of congress i made 25 trips to the middle east region, including numerous trips to the west bank. i have a strong supporter of a two state solution. i have been pushing hard to get israel more autonomy to the west bank because i have visited the palestinian security forces there and i applaud the fact that they are competent and trained and are keeping peace in west bank cities. host: the event at the wilson center with john brennan is available on the c-span website and our video library, and you can see more of what we talked about in the center. we are going to take a break, and our final segment, we do " america by the numbers."
we will have statistics that show about the us prison population and what the trends have been over the last couple of decades. >> here is the building going up in 1903. it was not the first, not the tallest. we have seen this all the time. stop and think what is the technology. basically back in the 1890's when they were introduced, they were explained as a railroad bridge on its end. most people were afraid of this thing, and as a matter of fact, you might think we were all loving it. actually this thing looked a little scary. the poor guy who had this building was not too happy. he could not rent it out, could not sell it. no one wanted to be in it because they figured the building would topple over there it >> architectural historian
barry lewis on the late 19th and 20th century. part of american history tv this weekend on c-span three. >> osama bin laden was a strategic communicator with various and disparate outfits, and to a certain extent--i worked in afghanistan, and i worked in iraq, and we knew osama bin laden personally. we were involved into medications to try to corral, and we knew he was making out reach early on and involved in all these types of things working through mediums and other individuals. as a consequence, no surprise when you are talking about a global ideology, he was relevant. >> how has counterterrorism and national security changed since the death of osama bin laden?
officials and analysts weigh in. see what they have to say online at the c-span video library, all archived and searchable. this weekend on "book tv," seth jones documents the war against al qaeda since nine/11 in "hunting in the shadows." also this weekend, your questions and comments for tom brokaw him a "in-depth," sunday at 9:00 a.m., 10:00 a.m. eastern. host: our final hour is called "america by the numbers," looking at the statistics the government keeps about our country. today we will focus on the prison population. let me introduce you to two guests. james lynch is in our studio, the direction of the bureau of justice statistics, a
presidentially nominated position. and of course it resides in the us department of justice. thank you for being here. joining us from new york is michael jacobson, the executive director of the vera institute of justice. he was the former new york city corrections commissioner. explain to our audience what the vera institute does. it is a nonpartisan research organization. we run demonstration projects in new york city and run a host of technical assistance in states struggling with criminal justice reform. host: we will be looking at the numbers the government tracks about the correctional population of the united states, those people imprisoned at various levels, and also on parole and probation. we will learn a little bit more about what is best, how the
system has been trending, with our guests. e jacobson will talk with you about the policy debates to accompany these numbers. we welcome your calls and your tweets and your e-mails. we will put all those addresses on the screen. let me start here with our first slide, a look over two decades, 1980 to 2010. the adult correctional population in any of those categories -- probation, in jail, prison, or on parole. what do we see? guest: it went from around 2 million people in 1982 over 7 million people today. that is a pretty massive increase. host: at the same time the population has increased, so if you were due--if you were doing a percentage of population, how do we do? guest: the prison population has
increased four times, and the regular population has increased nowhere near that number. host: what do we learn from this chart? guest: when you consider a sharp increase, the bars give you a sense of how many people are under correctional supervision at any given time in a particular year. you can see that in the 1980s and early 1990s, a sharp increase in the prison population. you can also see it has begun to slow in the last 10 years or so. that red line, which is more difficult to interpret, is the rate of change, annual percentage change. although the numbers are going up, the number of people, in custody, the rate of change is going down to the point where he drops into the negative range in 2008. after this massive increase, we have finally started a trend down. host: the obvious question is,
what is the why behind these trends? guest: there are several. crime became a political issue in the late 1960's and early 1970's. the war on drugs, three strikes laws, the use of mandatory minimum sentences, when thinning sentences, having parole agencies send people back for parole violations. there are five or six reasons that explain this increase. east -- the increase started in the last 40 years up until jim said, the last couple of years, a steady increase in these populations. host: if you live in the eastern or central time zones, -- you are most welcome to talk to us and ask questions about our policy of incarceration,
the pluses and minuses for society come obviously in public safety, also in crime prevention and security, and also the cost of all this. if you look at the factors in deciding prison policy, i mentioned a book safety and cost. are there others? the major ones. public safety is the paramount issue, but there are also issues of fairness and other things that figure in erie it once you use the course of power and state, you have to use it judiciously and fairly. i would add to that, issues of fairness and equity. host: this next slide looks at changes in state, federal, prisons and local jails. it looks as though the federal level has not increased at the same rate as state prison or jail. guest: part of this is a scale
issue on the chart. in a lot of ways, the feds have increased substantially as well. the size of our federal corrections system is not as big as that of the state, so people in the correctional federal system have rocha and federal laws come up whereas much of our criminal laws are formulated by the states, so -- host: would you explain the difference between jail and prison, state prison? guest: jails are largely for people who are primarily pretrial detainees. they have been arrested, they cannot make ale, so they are waiting in jail for their trial or a plea to happen. also, usually jails are for people who have been sentenced but usually less than a year. in texas, less than two years.
prison is, by and large, filled with people who have been convicted of a felony and are serving at a minimum of one year, and in some states, two years. jails, you cannot tell quite by these numbers, is people's most commonly spirits with incarceration because around 12 million people a year are admitted to jail in this country. host: with the overcrowding issues in some states, has that transferred populations between facilities? guest: there are some states -- louisiana, new mexico -- that house significant amounts of their prison population in jails, largely because of capacity issues, sometimes there are local sheriffs and make money on these things by housing people in jails. for the most part, able serving felony prison sentences reside in state prisons. but the crowding situation,
while not as bad as it once was, is still pretty bad in several states. host: we bring up the money issue. let me show you, our audience, some of the numbers they have assembled. this is the taxpayer cost for state prisons per inmate. the average annual cost per inmate, about $31,000. michael jacobson, help us understand that $31,000 number and the relative value for the public who pays it. guest: there are several issues buried in that number. the $31,000 is an average, so you have some southern states as low as $14,000 or $15,000. any eastern states are more, new york at 60,000. prison is a very expensive resource intensive punitive
function, so it should be used with nuance and with some care. it caused a tremendous--it costs a tremendous amount of money, and it should be expensive. running a safe, secure, well -- programmed facility for people who spend years there is expensive. one of the themes that run through our report is that because it is so expensive, states should less try to contain the daily cost than really be careful about overusing prison. i think there is no question that in this country, we have overused prison. we have defaulted to prison for many crimes that prison was not necessary for. host: it looks to me like this next chart looks to that question about how reasons are used. guest: this break round the prison population by commitment
offense that brought them to prison. you can see there are a number of things that occur. one is that much of our prison resources -- you can see by that top line -- are used for violent offenders. so the bulk of the prison population, the state prison population, given time. at the same time, there have been some changes early in the middle 1980's. you can see the sharp increase in the use of reason resources for drug offenders. especially late 1980's, early 1990's, when the drug wars were going on in our major cities. we responded by incarcerating drug offenders at a high rate. host: also the arrival of the "three strikes you are out" policy? guest: we may forget how high
the violence was at that point in time, and the public reaction was a much stricter sentence, so people went away for longer periods of time. host: we have many more numbers, but i want to get our viewers into this discussion. staying with the cost issue, michael jacobson, i want to read this tweet from you-- guest: a good question, and he is right. for years it was one of the fastest-growing private sector businesses. they are still a big player in this world. they have about seven to nine or 10 % of all the populations you see here. a lot of states, especially in the south and southwest, right- two-work states, make use of private prisons. some like new york, union
states, do not. the federal system makes big use of private prisons. they have shrunk a little, but they are still a force to be reckoned with. host: another twitter question on private prisons. guest: it is a good question, and the answer differs in almost every state. some states pay on a per diem basis. that is, for each person there, a state will reimburse x amount of dollars. some are structured that you have to have a minimum number of reasons, and if they fall below that, there are penalties. one of the keys to good correctional practices, if you are going to use private prisons, is to have very tight
well -- structured contract, what you are responsible for the treatment and well-being of prisoners. host: a few headlines about states and incarceration rates. "atlanta journal," "sweeping changes to state sentencing laws pass committee." and ohio -- since you are at the department of justice, is it the same level of discussion about the effectiveness of jailing prisoners going on there as well? guest: that is a big concern both in the federal system, and justice, especially the component of justice and justice programs. they are interested in state policies as well, and they have a lot of activity. i think my colleague at the
national institute of justice has a panel going on now about this and it issue, looking at the issue of incarceration and punishment. it is a very keen interest. also in the federal system, where using -- as the population grows, it becomes a bigger part, so people are keen on the idea of do we have to do this out and looking at that question very seriously. host: "the washington post," an analysis piece by mark fisher. here is the headline. "judging the judgment: does the punishment fit the crime?" i am sure, michael jacobson, you have some thoughts on that, but i want to get a caller in. lisa, you are on the air.
caller: yes, i want to know, are the majority of people in prison african-americans? two, why are prisoners being traded on the stock market? three, what role did the war on drugs has to play in prison sentences, and should we take away the war on drugs? it is not working because we spend more money on prison because of drugs than anything. i will hang up and take your comment. we have a chart here that looks at the rates of prisoners. can you answer her question with numbers western mark guest: there is a big discrepancy between the incarceration rate of african-americans and other
race groups. african-americans are traditionally between six and 6.5 times the incarceration of the white population. the caller is correct in the sense that there is substantial racial disproportionality. host: what about her question about the stock market and private prisons? guest: there is a question about whether private prisons should be in the first place. i am not a big fan, largely because of the philosophical reason. i, myself, think that is a state function that should be private site--do not think that is a state function that should be privatized. giving private capital the power to use deadly force to kill someone, which correction officials are empowered to do in some cases, that is a tremendous responsibility. but here we are and we have
private prisons, so if you are going to have them, they have to be regulated very closely because of the potential for abuse and the power they have. i think you're caller raises a good question. that is a subject of a fair amount of debate in this field. host: her last question was on the effectiveness of the war on drugs. mr. jacobson? i am sorry, i had an audio problem. guest: can you hear me now western mark there is no question that the war on drugs, one of the results is not just a huge increase -- is not just a huge increase, those folks are largely african-american or latino. we know from research that drug use is not that disproportionate in the general population. so that war on drugs has largely resulted in hugely disproportionate numbers of
minorities in prison. the other issue with that is we know from the research that over -- punishing will not increase public safety. you are taking people who are essentially low-risk folks and turning them into high-risk folks by putting them in prison and leave with a felony conviction. host: the incarceration statistics really do not change very much whether it is male or female. do you have a chart on female prisoners western mark--on female prisoners? guest: not quite as great a proportionality for women as men in terms of african-american women, compared to white women. in the last few years we have
seen drops in this population, so that the white population is increasing at a slow rate, but the african-american population particularly for women has begun to decline. guest: this red line here is black, non-hispanic females, and this is white non-hispanic females. guest: there is a little change in the way the office of management and budget required people to classify race, allowing for the possibility of multiple races. there is a little bit of that going on, but that does not explain the entire drop. host: next up is a caller from orlando named joe. caller: good morning. i worked in 1973 in new york city as a veterans counselor, and part of my job, i once
visited a prison in new york state. my impression was that many of the veterans who were incarcerated were there because of either drug use or drug addiction, first of all, and i think that is a good testimony. i am very concerned about this privatization trend of the prisons. i think it is outrageous that an incarcerated population should be exploited for profit. i would like to know if there is something we could do about that. i think one idea would be to require some type of a requirement that a state would have to vote in favor of this idea before it becomes real. i heard one statistic once -- i do not know if i have it exactly right -- we are three percent
of the world population and we have 25% of the incarcerated people of the entire world. "washington journal -- host: let's look at number six. what can we learn from it? guest: you can see again the war on drugs that was referred to earlier, evidenced here by the drug offenders in state prison. you see 1985 to about 1991, there is this massive increase. another thing you see, these are the admissions -- the blue line is admissions, and the red line is the total number of people charged with drug offenses. that space is an indicator of the length of sentence. this says that drug sentences are not that long, but there has been a constant increase in the people admitted to prison for
drugs. you may spend less than two years for drug offenses compared to five years for violence. that is what is going on, that there has been an increase in flow of drug offenders into the prison system. host: let me jump to the number 11 chart. those in state prison of hispanic origin. guest: the race groups are broken down and the shades tell you this is our survey of inmates. every five years or so we do a survey asking them questions about themselves and their criminal and drug involvement, mental health problems, and so on. you can see for the black, non- hispanic, that. during 1986, 1991, there was a massive increase in the proportion of people entering prisons for drug offenses from the african-american population, and it stayed there. it went from seven percent to
25% and stayed flat. if you look at the hispanic population, they, too, experienced this increase. but it has begun coming down. or the white, non-hispanic population, that is trending up erie it so the war on drugs, there is pretty dramatic evidence that the war on drugs effect on the black, non- hispanic population and the hispanic population is pretty dramatic. host: next up is andy. caller: i was incarcerated in mexico for 241 days before the charges were dropped and i was released. there cost per prisoner is $.50 a day if you are a state prisoner and about four dollars a day if you are a federal prisoner. how many of the folks who are incarcerated are not -- us
citizens, number one? and how many folks who are incarcerated are in the immigration system, in the custody of immigration officials? host: those are good questions -- guest: those are good questions. i recollection is, about four percent of the state is in population were foreign-born. that is different than it illegal aliens and so on. as you will see, there are other charts here that talk about that. in the federal system, it is much different. the federal system, people in for immigration offenses, is pretty substantial -- is a pretty substantial part of the federal prison population. they are on the southwest border area. in general, non-citizens, as
best we can estimate them, the foreign-born, not a great percentage of the prison population. host: we went to the international center for prison studies for this look at how america fares with the prison population, and as you can see from the chart, the united states leads, according to reported numbers, at 748 per 100,000 population. next is russia, 600,000. then a rant, britain, china, france, germany, and japan. what is your perspective on the comparison incarceration rates, michael jacobson? guest: there is no question that the us locks up a greater
percentage than any other country. i think one of your callers says we have about five percent of the world population and 25% of the world's prisoners. it is a huge issue, how much we imprison. criminologists call it mass imprisonment because there are so many crimes and sanctions, sent to prison. many states are now re-examining their use of prison, and you can see in jim's numbers, there have been a couple of years, even though there are small climbs in the state prisoners, given 40 years of growth, it is an important, sort of hopeful trend we have been seeing. host: so many people have been asked about drug sentencing policy. that's look at federal prisoners, chart number 12. it is the total population going up overall, but the drug
incarcerations lead the way. guest: it is interesting because the old thought was that the federal population were all accountants. you can see that is changed over time. the largest category is drugs. largely immigration offenses, and in this case, buttons offenses. host: what is the dotted line, public order? guest: that is to distinguish it. host: where would the classic white-collar criminals follow -- where would the classic white-collar criminals fall? guest: usually it is fraud. host: from iowa, john, you are on. caller: susan, this is a
wonderful topic to pick, something people need to learn more about. i heard mr. jacobson talking, and i appreciate so much the fact that he brought up that racial disparities, according to crime rates, do not change across the board, but we imprison minorities at a much higher rate. i was curious if either one of your guests is familiar with thehelle sanders' new book, " new jim crow mass incarceration ," why so many people are now in prison. i am curious if they have any comment on it. host: let me answer the first question. our producer, john gallagher, did a lot of work on it. part of our "washington journal" staff erie it so that we can tell you more about the work that they do and the numbers
that keep track of our society. michael jacobson, his comment to you, please. guest: he is right. michelle alexander has written a powerful book that i encourage everyone to read. it is part of a literature that has been growing for a couple decades around a variety of ills of imprisoning so many people, imprisoning african- americans and latinos disproportionately. there is an expert consensus in the research community that we imprison too many people, that we use prison unfairly in terms of race. her book is the latest example of a piece of work on that, but there is such a huge body of work now that is critical of our policy. it is one of the many reasons that states and localities are re-examining the use of prison. it is interesting because you can see on jim's chart, the
federal system is lagging behind in that re-examination. it continues to grow over a very rapid rate. there are states all over the country, even very conservative states like texas, that have made public pronouncements that they cannot continue to do what they have done for decades anymore. host: this question i will ask both of you to tackle. i am not sure if your statistics can answer this. how many mentally ill people are being housed in prisons, not hospitals? why not rebuild public mental health dismantled by the private sector western mark guest: john steadman has looked for years about the relationship between mental health population, especially in jails. often you have a population that is largely incompetent and moves between the two institutional settings.
we do have some data on the mental health capacity of prisoners that has not been released yet. we are looking at that, especially in the jail population. there is a fairly high rate of milner -- of mental health population. host: mr. jacobson? guest: this is a huge issue. i believe right now the los angeles jail system is the largest mental health facility in the united states. jail systems all over the country are full of folks who are mentally ill, both as your caller suggested, both because we have largely dismantled some of the community mental health programs that we have had, and also as police start to enforce low-level crimes, people who are
mentally ill commit a lot of those crimes -- aggressive panhandling, public urination. they struggle mightily and they want to do the right thing, but the jail systems are not set up for people with severe until illness. that is a position they find themselves in right now. to this chart which goes to the cost of operating prisons. it shows that the underfunded public pension problem extends to the prison system erie it that is the top number we have here. underfunded costs to retiree healthcare, $2 billion. employee benefits, $613 million. pension contributions, $600 million. capital costs, $485 million. what should we take away from
these numbers, michael jacobson? how hugely expensive these systems are. one of the goals of the report is to lay out in some detail, when you take into account all the costs, just the cost reflected in a corrections budget, but all the costs that go to support a prison system, how hugely expensive these systems are. because they are so expensive and because they are growing, they also crowd out other costs that you need to spend in other essential areas of government, whether healthcare or education. very difficult to do that when you have systems that are growing at this rate and are this expensive. the message from our report is really examined your use of prison, who you are using it for. there are obviously folks who belong in prison, but not everyone longs in prison. the way to drive down those costs is to use prison intelligently and take into
account a variety of possible other sanctions that you can use without imprisoning people. host: caller, what is your name and where are you calling from? caller: my name is bud and i am in ft. lauderdale. i think the discussion today is totally misguided. it is not the cost of incorporation -- it is not the cost of incarceration that is so high. it costs far more to try a case than to incarcerate the guilty. i have a reason for saying that. i know people involved in the projects and they check that. it was a project to schedule attorneys, state attorneys, to try cases, but then they started tracking costs. it is far, far more expensive to try a case than it is to incarcerate, even a long
incarceration. far more expensive. what we are as a country without a moral centered core, we have not been educated to be not so selfless. everybody is only thinking about their own selves and thus they think it is ok to take or commit crimes. but the problem is not the cost of the incarceration, although that is too high, but it is the cost of trying. host: let's ask mr. lynch whether or not statistics are kept on the cost of trying. guest: remember, it is difficult to distinguish because some are borne privately. you have to remember that a very small proportion of the people sentenced actually go through a
full adjudication process with a trial and a jury and so on. i agree that the cost for a full-blown jury trial, exercising all your rights, is expensive, but a fairly small proportion of people are admitted to prison. mostly plea-bargain--most plea- bargain, so it is truncated. he is right on an individual case basis. host: do you have an aggregate sense based on the caller's comments? guest: as jim said, almost 95% of cases are resolved with a plea bargain, and that could happen within a month or two of being arrested. clearly it is the cost of incarceration that is the major concern here, even though there may be individual cases where the cost of a trial outweigh the
cost of incarceration. host: "the times-picayune was put in the whirlwinds has something -- in new orleans -- you can see the headline. "jefferson reports to texas prison today." almost three years after he was convicted, former congressman william jefferson has been ordered to report to low- security prison in texas to begin his 13-year sentence erie the nine-term democrat must report by noon erie it the judge recommended that he be assigned to a prison camp near new orleans, but he declined. prosecutors concurrent with the recommendation of a prison camp, the least restrictive. he requested that he be sent to
a prison camp in pensacola, but he has been sent to a low- security jail. there are different grade issues in the federal system. what is a camp? guest: a camp can be a facility that has no bars, has very little -- not cells and so on, usual living accommodations, more freedom of movement and so on. the federal system has the benefit of being very large, and if you try to put like visitors with like prisoners, they have the benefit of a classification system where they can move people all over the place, which is quite good. then he states, and certainly the jails, do not have that kind of luxury. host: we have only about two minutes left. we often hear it reported that we have an aging prison population.
this chart looks at male prisoners by age. what do the numbers tell us? guest: you have inmates surveys, and you can see that the two darker bars are the earlier surveys from 1996 and 2000. you can see in that case the distribution is skewed toward the younger people, and then as you get down the age range, you see more and more of the population in 2010, people who are 35, 39. that sounds young to me, but in prison parlance, that is getting up there. then you see increases in 40, 44, and then 45 to 54. host: so it is aging. guest: yes, it is. and there are two sources. host: ft. lauderdale, arthur.
a quick question. you are our final caller. caller: i will try to be real brief. i went to prison in 2006. i had an attorney who helps me just do one year. when i got there, i was asked, "what are you doing here?" at that time i worked for an american company and my skill was computer programming and tech support.
what are the odds of an x- prisoner being able to put on that application, in honesty, that they have offended? host: i will stop you there because of our time. michael jacobson, what are hiring statistics for people who have served time western mark guest: they are very poor. one of the consequences of building our prison system to the scale it is now, cumulatively we have millions of people who have left prison, paid their debt to society. but with a felony conviction, it is incredibly hard to get a job, find a place to live, make enough money legally to support a family, which is why the federal government is paying so much attention to reentry and second chances. the consequences of having a felony conviction,
disproportionately people of color, is a huge problem in this country that we are now really starting to deal with in a pretty intensive way, as we should. host: to our guests, thank you so much. both to james lynch's organization and michael jacobson's organization during we have put them on our screen. there are lots of policy discussions that this country is grappling with with the prison population. thank you to michael jacobson in new york and james lynch here in washington for giving us the numbers that look at america's prisons and incarcerated population overall. thank you. to our viewers, another friday has come and gone. thank you for being with us on "the washington journal." we will be back tomorrow morning at seven o'clock eastern. thank you and we will see you then.
[captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> the u.s. economy picked up 115,000 jobs in april. the labor reports today the unemployment rate fell from 8.2% to 8.1%, the lowest jobless rate in three years. the long-term unemployed, those out of work for 27 weeks or more, is little changed. that represents more than 40% of the jobless rate. the libertarian party selected their presidential nominee this weekend in vegas. the live coverage will begin tonight at 9:00 p.m. eastern with a two hour debate between candidates and will continue tomorrow with the nominee's
election. as a "washington"washington goes on the road this weekend to north carolina. tomorrow -- "washington journal" for those on the road. and sunday, the city mayor of charlotte, n.c. then a discussion with the mayor of raleigh, n.c., on monday. >> i do not regard this as just a biography of lyndon johnson. i wanted to examine the political power in america. this is a kind of political power, seeing what a president can do in a time of great crisis. how he gathers all round. that is a way of examining power in the time of pressure. i want to do this in full.
i just wanted to examine this. >> robert caro on "the passage of power," the fourth volume in his biography. that is sunday, may 20th, for the second part. >> spend the weekend in oklahoma city with "booktv" and "american history tv." and fallen's must read list the president of oklahoma university, david boren. the history of science collection at the university of oklahoma. and tour the oklahoma city bombing memorial with the co-
designer. and look at african-american life in 1920's oklahoma. the special collection in the oklahoma history center. supporting the literary and history in cities across the nation. this weekend, in the oklahoma city, on c-span2 and 3. >> the center for strategic studies hosted a study on comprehensive cyber security including a keynote address from the german federal minister from the interior. this is about 25 minutes.
>> ladies and gentlemen, good afternoon. i think we will start our final conversation today. if you could take your seats, please. i know it is hard when a minister leaves the room. thank you very much. we have what i would call it power panel. three experts on cyber security. what we are going to try to accomplish in our discussion this afternoon is coordinating comprehensive cyber policy. i think if there has been one theme that has been woven throughout the entire day of discussion from all of the panels -- it is coordination at all levels. and the difficulty of the coordination. to help us understand how this works in a comprehensive or
whole of government approach to cyber policy, we have with us the deputy assistant secretary in the department of homeland security and the office of cyber security and communications. bobby has had such an extensive experience, a distinguished career in government. in her position today, she is that intersection between the department of public security and the private sector, another theme that has run through this conversation of how important it is to be so closely connected to what is going on in the private sector. she has been responsible for deploying a cyber risk management program at dhs, as well as coordinating the national response system. primary to this, she was chief information officer for the defense information systems agency, and has a lot of
experience in policy planning and how the department of defense communication and information technology system has worked together. because we had a little flip flop in our schedule, she will have to leave at 2:40, so we will give her the floor first to give her remarks. if we could front-load the questions in the beginning before she has to leave, that would be terrific. moving down our panel, which are delighted to have with us jonatan vseviov, the acting undersecretary for defense policy at the estonian ministry of defence. the estonian government has been pushing policy innovation at the european level and with nato. we have asked the undersecretary to give us some remarks not only in an eu capacity, but also on the nato front. he has long experience in the defense ministry as well as the foreign ministry. great roles in policy planning.
we are delighted to welcome him back to washington. he served at the estonian embassy in washington from 2005-2008. thank you so much for being with us. last, but certainly not least, we are absolutely delighted to have ivailo kalfin, a member of the european parliament and vice chair of the committee on budgets. if that is equivalent to our appropriations committee, you have enormous power. we are glad you are with us and head the bulgarian social delegation in the european parliament. perhaps one of the most interesting jobs of many in the european parliament. you are the recon tour for the digital agenda flagship and on critical information infrastructure protection and cyber security protection. one of the leading, if not the
leading, leader on these issues in the european parliament. prior to service in parliament, he was the deputy prime minister and minister of foreign affairs of bulgaria from 2005- 2009. he played a critical role in bulgaria's eu succession. from 2002-2005, he was secretary of economic affairs for the president of bulgaria. we are honored by having such distinguished leaders here. with that, i will be quiet and turn it over to bobby. thank you so much. >> thank you for the opportunity to talk to you today. you obviously heard from our deputy secretary this morning. she is a powerhouse in that regard. one of the things i am sure she expressed is that homeland security and cyber security are not something one person does by themselves, any one organization, any one nation,
anyone. that is the underlying theme of everything we do in the office of cyber security and communications. we have two principal responsibilities. one is protection and defense of the .gov the second is working with our private sector partners for protection in the critical infrastructure. in both of those cases, it is no one single organization 's responsibility. it is a very international mechanism. i wanted to take a moment to frame a number of our program activities around the structure that we use in the eu-u.s. working groups.
that has been a powerful mechanism. cyber security can easily become a very technical conversation. there are very technical parts of that conversation. but there is very much the need for the activities at the strategic policy operational levels in order for us to be successful. in the way we have shaped this work with the working groups, we focus on things like management. i had an opportunity to hear about the network of contacts. how do we do incident management when something is occurring? and how do we work with that so we are not making connections as we need them, but we have made them and matured them over
time? the cyber planning is making those connections before we need them. in that incident management role, as a department, we have a range of capabilities that we passed out every day. the national cyber security and communications integration center is a public-private interaction around the clock. we have the ability to leverage and put the contacts on a cert- to-cert relationship with private industry and foreign partners. we execute that through handling of real-live events, and through exercises in advance of those types of events. the partnership, i cannot speak strongly enough. it has been a privilege to work with our private-sector
partners. they worked internationally. although it certainly is not something we can do ourselves, how do we ship everything from information sharing agreements in a way that enables us to be open and engaged with our private-sector counterparts, and enable them to function in all of the places they do as a company? how do we work to ensure that what we know about whatever the event might be, or the vulnerability might be, or the technical data is shared not only with our international partners, but with our private sector partners, it equally and in a way that is keeping within both roles and those responsibilities? the public-private partnership working group has been working
on things like bot nets, taking advantage of international innovation in those areas. in addition to the cyber crime working group, but secret service and customs and border patrol and other law enforcement agencies, awareness- raising is the fourth working group over there, one where we have substantial program activities in the department as well. october is national cyber security awareness month in the united states. over the course of the last year, we have worked in partnership not only with the european union, but with other nations, to make it or some similar activity an international activity. common media where possible, common messaging, so that awareness-raising is such an important part. individuals have to understand their responsibilities as well. those working groups under this u.s.-eu activity provide a good framework for describing how we work. and how our programs align with
the mission responsibilities of our department, and how that aligns with our international activities, and really lay a good foundation for that understanding, at a cert-to- cert management level, and how we function and the kinds of norms that might be necessary in that engagement. i welcome the opportunity to be joined on this panel. >> thanks so much. >> thank you, heather. thank you all for your interest in cyber security. i want to talk by saying that i agree with everything the german minister just said. he started his presentation by highlighting the technological development in the last 10 and 20 years, and mentioning the health care systems. we talk about governance and education. coming from a country called estonia, the internet is a lifestyle.
we are internet-dependent. we all must consider internet access to be a human right. when we do not get wifi access, we get agitated. we do 95% of our banking transactions online. we cast our votes on line. 25% of the votes in the parliamentary election were on line. you can establish a company using the internet in 15 minutes and do your taxes in five minutes. the government pre-fills the tax forms. the log onto the computer and make sure they have the data correct, and you press send. it takes about five minutes, the whole process. we have a health care system. it is paperless. we are dependent on the internet and the fact that the internet functions.
the way we function as businesses and citizens. as you mention, i was in washington in 2007. we became the victim of a cyber attack. nothing destructive when what could be achieved with the technological means, but what we experienced really was not a major thing. however, i was here in washington and it could not access my e-mail, newspapers, do bank transactions, and it could not function as a citizen. that lasted for a few hours. that lasted for days, weeks, or months, we could not have functioned as a society. we have been thinking but cyber
secured before 2007, but there really made us move faster on approving a national strategy to combat cyber attacks. in 2008, we approve the technology. i will describe our approach in a few layers. the first is the individual level. the security of your own private computer write your home where it is important to make sure that there is no now where, no one has taken it over to you is your private computer. the government's role in that realm is obviously limited. our role in that area is basically limited to awareness- raising. we have asked our major internet service providers to notify the internet users when they access pages that could be dangerous.
the internet service providers then also offer you a decision with links to other anti-virus websites. the second layer is what we would call the whole of nations. not just told government, but whole nation. this is where it really becomes important. it highlights the need for intra-agency corporation. no one agency can be in charge of cyber. we do need a coordinator, obviously, but no one can be in charge of cyber as a whole. the national cyber defense strategy, the division of labor establishes a coordinating body between the government agencies. what is clear when it comes to cyber is the role to which the government is limited. the government owns a minor share of the internet.
much of it is in the private sector. much of the critical infrastructure is owned by private companies and private citizens so we need more than just enter-agency but a nationwide approach. the best example i can bring a for estonia is the cyber defense league. it is the cyber arm of our voluntary national defense organization, something like the national guard in the united states. the cyber defense league is a voluntary organization that brings together cyber experts from our banks, major corporations, and our military to first get to know each other and to conduct different cyber exercises and in times of need use it as a resource to secure the government websites, and the private sector websites it necessary. the added value comes from the fact that this allows their cyber experts to interact with
the government, each other, and conduct these that would be either too expensive or too time-consuming and we provide the framework. the third layer, also critically important, is the international aspect of cyber security. you cannot do cyber defense nationally. the internet is global. we are linked to each other. the attack in 2007 did not come from inside dystonia. the computers that were taken over work in egypt, the united states, and elsewhere. in those situations you need international cooperation to deal with the attack. much of that cooperation is -- this is difficult to admit, but it is integral. they tend to know each other. they know the phone numbers to call. they know what service systems
they need from different countries to shut down the computers, the servers, the networks. the cooperation needs a legal framework that when this is where the cyber crime council in europe that was mentioned by the minister comes in. it is a legal instrument of great importance to which every nation in the world should become a party of. finally, a few words on nato. there are people who know more about this than i do, but nato has done a lot to deal with ciba defense. they have raised cyber security on their agenda. the last summit in lisbon past the alliance to create a cyber defense policy. we have made a lot of progress. much more needs to be done though. i do hope that the summit in chicago will not only a firm we have made progress since lisbon
or will move the alliance even further. the task native has currently is limited to their own networks and then the networks owned by national governments that are critical for their operations. coming from the ministry of defence, i am very keen on defense matters. again, assuming that cyber is becoming a major international relations, that would be the same as nato declaring that it is an alliance for protecting the air bases. this is not the reason why the taxpayers bonn does and why we have an alliance -- fund us and why we have an alliance like nato. the protect our societies, people, but if it is coming
higher importance, the need to do know. there's cooperation with privacy issues, corporations, etc.. we need to have those discussions and seed whether nato can work as a trans- atlantic alliance. the united states has really pick up the leadership role in that regard. it has paid a lot of attention on integrating cyber aspects to military planning, for instance and i think the task of nato is to know to follow the lead of the united states and figure out how we, as an alliance, can contribute to cyber security. >> thank you so much. mr. kalfin. >> it is not easy to speak for me. wouldke to present what i
like to see in the future in the legislation as a member of the european parliament. i'm happy to be here with my colleague that was moderating one of the panels before who is also very much involved in areas related to cyber security. if we look back, we shall see that the major developments in terms of cyber security, from the perspective of the transatlantic cooperation has been developing in the last few months. two years ago, cyber security issues were perceived to be very sexy in the european parliament. we have to do something on that. particularly, we definitely have
a good example for the transatlantic efforts. the whole process, which was unlocked in 2010 were the cyber security appeared to be quite high on the agenda. there were a number of working groups that had been created and it may help to start thinking in a more productive way about cyber security. we have pieces of legislation here and there. i would say that in the eu, we're working towards having a single concept of what cyber security means. i am one of those who thinks that it is not about regulating.
it is about creating systems that are dynamic. the threats to the internet, the threats to cyberspace, you cannot just protect the internet space. need to create something that is flexible enough to create a response and prevention to cyber attacks. this is why i am very much looking forward to see the cyber security strategy. something, again, that i think is a very good example. united states and some member states of the european union will see how we can make this process happen in the european union level which would be much more different than looking at
cyber security strategies and efforts. right now in the european parliament, we're dealing with a number of issues relating to the internet in the development of the internet. this is dealing with the directive of the it infrastructure. this deals with the attack on infrastructure. we have a review of the european network information security agency mandates. we expect a new version of the data directive and we will come up with a cloud computing strategy.
we apply of issues in the pipeline in terms of legislation on cyber security. that is the general concept, the general framework spiteful -- the general framework. we're going to have some trouble. this will also affect relations with the u.n. and other international partners. the european cyber-crimes a center is a very good example. we have some ideas about cooperation in the european union with a number of stakeholders. to me, the key of the cyber
strategy will all be coordination is more or less everybody knows what has to be done. it has to do very much with coordination. we need to find the appropriate manner to make it. i would like, very briefly, to talk about what is expected and how i would see the development in terms of cyber security in the next few months in the european union. my hope is that not all this will be wishful thinking. again, this is just developing. first is the mere concept of critical infrastructure. i do not know whether you know done, but according to the
agenda, [inaudible] i.c.t. is not considered to be "critical infrastructure." water supply is also not considered to be a critical infrastructure in europe so we need to be clear on the target than the systems we consider to be "critical." this understanding needs to be in line with the sector. when we speak about strategy, it really has to allow for innovation, a free flow of innovation -- a free flow of information. you cannot put everything into raising the policy framework. i still think that this needs to be faced.
there should be much better incentives for the industry in much better cooperation between the institutions and the private sector. you have very large international companies, and, again, this is another example of cooperation for the corporation -- the cooperation between the u.s. and us needing to develop it further. we need to develop legislation on criminalization. online fraud is not criminalize d, so that is to be included in
the free market. the second development that you have an issue with is the resilience of the internet and these systems. it is very important to talk about this. i know is difficult to define. how you define the risks starks we have a good problem with various countries in europe, the u.k., germany, france and we have ones that exist on paper, without having elected this abroad. we need to tackle the new standard to help these countries and incentivize them. we need to encourage the
shareholders and the european union does not appear to have a position, of but this happens in another of corporations in the european union. jummy to give the ability to the regulators to perform their duties. i will not go into details. we need to have securitization and all this is very much important to be able to function in all the member states on this day colder policy, i think education will be key in the coming months and years we also
need to develop curriculum in and also from's the policy making point of view. this is something where the corporation can play a very good role. and a few words about international cooperation because many things have been said. he mentioned very clearly what would happen in the future in terms of international cooperation. i need to tell you something, frankly. this will bring problems in the transatlantic relationship and we have to deal with that. we have bad examples of the agreements which i do not see or
parliament and they very negatively affect the transatlantic corporation. i was one of those together with my delegation of bulgarian socialist working on this. it is an ideal agreement andrea plenty of questions about the pnr. there were different motivations, but i really think we have to not allow them to pile more and more off the coast. we have issues about privacy, having too much information, guarantees but and for mention, etc. -- guarantees for information. i will disagree on one.
previously. -- on point made previousl.y i see now some efforts to use this not as regulating the basics of the internet and there are some countries that would really like to do that but that would be the end of this. again, i would support we approached like-minded countries with the organization. i also agree with the developing countries and digest second of the policies. it has to be part of the european union, also. how do they develop an
appropriate internet strategy? all of these things are not that difficult to achieve, that much is clear, but there is really in need to make an effort on behalf of the national government and also the international corporations that they did not become infected. >> thank you so much. this is the last discussion of the day filled with expertise and we just received three outstanding presentations tel + print this. what we would like to do with the time remaining is asking you questions -- we just received 3 of standing presentations at the end of this day. bobby, if you can comment, we have been talking a bit about the operation, cyber atlanta,
the table top exercise. what came out of that exercise that surprised you? many of these tabletop exercises to bring more questions than answers. is there anything that put some new items on the table for cooperation? in an age ofhis austerity and budgets. you can either believe the strategy and forced -- and forced the budget or the other way around. trans atlantic fleet, we are all very focused on reducing budgets. -- transatlantically, we are all budgets.d on reducing the impossible question. within the lisbon treaty, one european nation will help others with the article v commitment in nato.
what does helping each other and solidarity count when a cyber attack happens? do we really understand to help one another when it happens? i do not know if you can answer that, but i would love to get your thoughts on that. let's start with you, bobbie, because we are short on time. >> certainly, the budget is on everybody's mind right now. certainly, it is not going anywhere. really, if i were to say what my concerns over the next 5-10 years is certainly the federal anyet because i do not seein the less in the austere timeframe. that will have a difference in how this will impact what we do,
so we need to be really realistic about what we can do, what we should do and how we need to do all these really important things. in that mentality, we looked for mama's that had to happen anyway. the dark about the fact that technology is revolutionizing things every day and those are moments that have to happen. we have to learn how to take advantage of those moments, either to every architect a technological solution or to look at changes in processes or policies. in the u.s. government, this is forcing a recognition alignment and more willingness to create working together as a whole government. 10 years ago, it was certainly more complicated than it is today. it is hopefully getting better in that situation.
i think it also lays the framework for answering your other two questions, which i will take as the same. if we talk about what we may have learned from the cyber- atlantic tabletop exercise last november, what i would say is that, in part, we learned things we knew. but you should know people before you have a crisis. to your point, we have a very different ideas in terms of what privacy and cyber security are. we know that in one level but we see this, as i recently saw it in practice, in that exercise, so those are opportunities that have a frank discussions about what limiting activities do. we need to have those
discussions because the one thing i do know is that every time we have had an incident that we have handled with our partners, we have done sort to certain interactions and there has always been someone on the other end of the phone -- cert to cert interactions. people will always show up when we need to handle these issues. when we do not have a common understanding, this will only happen unless we have more of these dialogues as we can actually get to a real life, everyday kind of interaction in that. wait questions. -- great questions. >> i will address the article 5 question.
as it is worded, and when it was worded back in 1949, no one had an idea about cyber security, nor did anyone think of an international terrorist organization using civilian airplanes against civilian targets. the clear policy of the alliance has been to surround article 5 with a couple of constructive things. we do not find the means or do not limit article five decisions to the means of the attack rather than the effects. it will always be a political discussion taken in consul as to a certain development or certain attack requires an article by response or niot. no one would have bought back in 1949 that in 2001 we would have
needed article 5. yes, clearly, if a cyber attack were to be destructive and directed against an ally of the organization the end that ally has the option of going to ask for article 5 help. in certain situations, when the cyber talks are destructive, they would consider them to be attacks and they would also make use of other kinetic means. that, i think, should be the policy of nato as well. "strangely enough, -- >> strangely enough, the budget is
a fast developing point. there are many things it could be done in times of a tight budget. talking about technology, software, updating, many things should be done. there are certain things that do not cost money in there are other things that put in a better perspective. if we do not trust cloud computing, we will not get the benefits of that platform. the small businesses, the platform, the businesses, but it could bring enormous benefits afterward to a rational economy.
any dollar or euro invested in these would be a very good investment. it would reap good benefits. about the budget constraints that affect all of the and doeses in europe, not mean that the cyber issue should not be a top of that list. hopefully the parliament will vote on this in june. i'm also suggesting the establishment of a legislative dialogue across the atlantic. i think this is a good idea. the chairman is someone we are considering in this particular issue. i am hoping they will go ahead with this type of cooperation.
i do not think they necessarily require the public, but it is essential to have progress in the internet. on the resilience, the u.s. strategy, i am not sure. the u.s. will have the right. this is something very important. i think all the other nato members are moving in that direction. the internet is becoming more and more vital for the functioning of our country in terms of life. the u.s. is leading in that
direction. you put forward very good questions. these will cooperate. i think it has to do with the confidence and assurance that other countries also have that capacity. i think this matter is more than the allied efforts. >> do you have any questions specifically for bobby before she has to jump? it was such a good presentation, you stunned them all. with that, let me thank our three panelists.
thanks to you, our audience. i think we have had an exceptional day. in one room, one day, we have had the deputy secretary, the commissioner, ministers, experts of the fbi, europol, what a treat. you have given us great food for thought in this is a subject matter that we hope to continue on in the future and you have given us a great agenda for the next several months. i thank you for that. a great thanks to christopher robb and our corporate sponsors, the estonian government that has been so supportive. i thank my colleague, jim lewis, the real mastermind cyber security at csis.
we are grateful for your comments, thoughts, insightful questions and we hope to see you back here very soon. join me in thanking our panel's and thank you again for joining us. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> the libertarian party will select their presidential nominee this week and that their national convention in vegas. they are celebrating their 40th anniversary. live coverage tonight at 9:00 p.m. eastern with a live debate. we continue tomorrow at noon with the nominee's election. president obama and first lady michelle obama heading the campaign trail tomorrow in
columbus, ohio, at the first of two obama for america campaign rallies. the second campaign stop is in richmond, va., live on c-span tomorrow where afternoon at 4:35 p.m. eastern on the campus of virginia commonwealth university. the president will also be at a high school in arlington, va., to discuss education and the importance of having a fair shot, the importance of higher indication, and the skills needed to find a good job. that will be live at about 11:50 a.m. eastern online on c- span.org. sunday on "q&a." >> i do not think this is just a biography of lyndon johnson, but i want every vote to look at the political power in america. -- i want every book to look at political power. to see what a president can do
in a time of great crisis. what does he do to get legislation moving? that is a way to examine the power in a time of crisis. i want to do this in full. it takes 300 pages, so that is why i wanted to examine that. >> robert caro on "the passage of power," volume four of the 36 presidents, london -- lyndon b. johnson. the second hour of conversation will be sunday, may 20th. china has indicated that the blind chinese activists will be able to study abroad. he remains in a guarded beijing hospital ward. the state department says he has been offered a fellowship at the american university and china will expedite travel for mr. chengm, his wife, and two
children. congressman christopher smith of new jersey cheers this two hour, 40 minute hearing. >> the commission will come to order. good afternoon. the daring escape of cheng was nothing short of miraculous and it has taken the world, not to mention the chinese officials and his guards, by complete surprise. it was a great relief that i come and millions rubble world, learned of his escape and reaching safety of the american embassy in beijing friday morning. it is with the equally great concern that i can be in this hearing today. having been handed over to the chinese officials by the american diplomats yesterday,
he, his wife, family, and friends appear to be in significant danger. notwithstanding potentially empty save the assurances, he has expressed a desire to leave and gain asylum for himself and for his family. questions indeed arise as to whether he was pressured to leave the u.s. compound. a cnn interview reported says his comments portray the united states as manipulating him, cutting him off from outside communications and encouraging him to leave the embassy rather than seek asylum. he said he was denied his request to call friends. he said he said he fell to the embassy officials had lied to him. they kept lobbying me to lead
and it promised to have people stay with me in the hospital. dissected in essence i checked into the hospital room, -- this afternoon as soon as i checked into the hospital room, they were all gone. i am very disappointed in the u.s. government. i do nothing the u.s. protected human rights in this case. -- i do not think they protected human rights. when asked why he left the embassy, he seems to blame the embassy officials. "at the time i did not have a lot of reformation. i was not allowed to call my friends from inside the embassy. i could not keep up with the news. i did not know a lot of things that were happening." if you stay, is there no future? he also said he tried calling two u.s. embassy officials numerous times but that nobody had answered. "i told the embassy i would like to talk to chris smith, but they somehow never arranged it. i feel a little puzzled. for the record, i placed a call
after being informed that he wanted to speak with me. i waited all night until 4:00 for a callback from the high u.s. official i was told could a range that in the call never came. there are many questions and even more concerns. how will the agreement to be enforced? what happens if chen or any member of his family suffers retaliation? where is his nephew? what happens now if the courageous young woman who drove chen to safety? there are many questions. and next week i hope to convene another meeting to take testimony from the obama administration witnesses and to get some answers.
our purpose today is to examine his case and it discern the likelihood his family and chen and supporters of any opportunity at safety going forward or whether asylum and -- whether asylum becomes an option. the story of chen guangcheng is extraordinary from the beginning. he pushed past profound years later when local villagers told him of their stories of the forced abortions and forced sterilizations, he and his wife documented these stories. they later built a brief for a class-action lawsuit for individuals involved. -- against the individuals involved.
they gained international news media attention in 2005 and their challenge to the draconian control policies spurred harsh and extended retaliation including torture and beatings. the commission and other committees of congress have examined china's population control policies many times. i have heard victims give testimony about that brutal policy. we heard from a woman that ran the program. she said, by day i was a monster. by night a wife and mother. she told hope the full weight of the dictatorship was behind her efforts to ensure children were not born. sometimes china paints a false picture for gullible foreigners. that it is somehow being eased or mitigated. there are a few exceptions. he and his wife, they faced huge
retaliation for speaking out against it. they maintain vigilance on the children. the english phrase they use is family planning, but it is not the family planning but the states. they use the word measured. when an out of planned birth takes place they impose fines on the couple. all unwed couples are forced to abort. this is the one that touches virtually every chinese, especially women and children. we now know there are missing girls by the tens of millions. the lost daughters of the china. it was chang won chang challenge these rights and that is when the hammer fell -- it was chen
guangcheng, but he has refused to back down. he and his family have paid a dear price. they have been repeatedly harassed and denied their basic freedoms for seven years. after serving more than four years in prison on trumped-up charges, he was released in 2010. only to be locked up with their family in their home under 24 hours surveillance with all forms of communication with the outside world severed. on more than one occasion he and his wife were beaten and denied medical treatment for injuries. their 6-year-old daughter was prevented from attending school. this was in violation of the child's right for an education and more payback for her parents' actions. in the past few months, this little girl has been permitted to attend a school but only with three guards with her everywhere she goes. all of this and more, chen and
his family have endured this as so-called free citizens under chinese law. it is no wonder when he was risking his life to escape this commission last week, he saw our help, the united states government. he urged the chinese government to address them fully and immediately. in a background briefing, a u.s. official in beijing explained chan expressed his wish to stay in china. they ensured the lives of normal citizens. it is unclear whether the path to asylum was discussed seriously or done so in a hurry or whether he was pressured in any way and at any time in the process to remain in china. especially with the summit that began today. he is now away from the embassy and a local hospital asking for
the right to leave. he said, i think we like the rest of the place outside of china. help my family and i leave safely, he told the associated press. the eyes of the world are watching to see his wishes are honored by the chinese government. i and everyone on our commission and in congress are concerned for the safety, where about some of his supporters. we are concerned about the other members of his family. that is why we are convening this important hearing today. i would like to yield to my good friend and colleague, the chairman of the human rights commission, congressman frank wolf. >> thank you. i want to begin by thanking the chair, congressman chris smith, who was championing chen in
congress. it is fitting that he reportedly requested to speak with congressman smith when he was at the u.s. embassy. one of the many questions surrounding his case, what the -- why that phone call was ever facilitated, as a new cycle unfolded yesterday, what began as a diplomatic triumph evolves into a fiasco. now the state of this man and -- now the fate of this man and his family hangs in the balance. it appears the most generous read of the administration's handle in this case was it was not even an accepting assurances, they have a history of brutally oppressing their own people. consider some of the following. in the last year alone more than 30 tibetans monks and nuns, they set themselves of flame in -- aflame in desperation at the
abuses of their people. every one of the underground catholic bishops is either in jail or under house arrest or under the strict surveillance are in hiding. they are routinely imprisoned and harassed. lawyers that defend them are often given the same fate. in fact, when i travel to china with congress and smith in 2008 before the beijing olympics, every single one of the lawyers we would have dinner with and what i were detained or warned not to attend. with one exception -- the one person who made it was placed under house arrest. china spends more on public security than on its own defense. and an attempt to control its population than on defense. china is an authoritarian state with a government continues to muzzle freedom of speech and rein in civil society.
the chinese government went so far this february to deny a visa to the u.s. ambassador for international freedom. the very time the bias president -- the vice president of china of china was meeting with the president of the united states. the ambassador for human rights and religious freedom could not even get a visa to go to china. of course, in china the barbaric practice of forced abortions and sterilization that chen is shining a bright line on. the list goes on. it is systematic of abuses committed by the chinese government against their own people. the washington post reported that china continues its crackdown on people who are believed to have helped chen.
brave individuals assisted him in breaking free from the cap tors. several have subsequently been placed under house arrest. in light of the realities in the newly emerging accounts of how the wife was treated in the days following the escape, chinese officials detained her, threatened to be her to death. it is hard to comprehend why the administration would accept at face value assurances he would be safe upon accepting u.s. protection. you wonder if there were other forces at work. prior to the arrivals of the secretary's clinton and a diner -- and geithner who were heading to beijing this week for high-level economic and foreign policies talk. was there a hint of coalition? -- coercion?
forced coercion? what were the state department and white house deliberations? when the dust settles i intend to request to review all traffic that surrounded these negotiations. the administration has an obligation to release the details of the deal struck with the chinese government, especially given out quickly it appears to have been unraveled. it has been reported that the u.s. government officials would stay with him at the hospital. according to one news account, he said, many americans will admit i checked into the hospital and doctors examined me. lots of them. when i brought to the hospital room, they all left. was he deceived? was that part of the arrangement? why did he find himself alone the isolated and fearful hours after he left u.s. protection. there are more questions than answers at this juncture.
i hope today's witnesses will shed some light on the matter, especially his friend and a person connected with some of the most courageous advocates. bob fu. even though there is not much we do not know, this much is certain. the obama administration has a high moral obligation to protect chen and his family. to do anything less would be scandalous. ronald reagan famously said the u.s. constitution is a continent -- covenant that we have made not only with ourselves but all of mankind. some in washington may forget it transcends history. freedom-loving people the world over know it is true. there is a reason the student protesters carried models of
what looked to be the statue of liberty. american missed an opportunity. america missed an opportunity. will this administration fail to see the historic moment? the world is watching, both dictators and dissonance. the administration must be bold. the minister is and must make -- the administration must make sure his safety and that of his family. if news reports are to be believed, the administration must grant him and his family asylum and refuse to apologize despite a chinese government' demands. throughout history of america's
embassies have been silence of freedom. recall the siberian seven seeking religious freedom and the right to immigrate lived in the u.s. embassy for five years in 1978. nobody in the carter administration or reagan administration said they had to leave. nobody said go out and be on your on. they allow them to stay five years. a defender of religious freedom -- he took refuge at a u.s. embassy for 15 years. chen found safety in the embassy and now that guarantee is jeopardized. i am confident there will come a day when the communist party's brutal reign will end and the chinese people will experience a new birth of people. -- freedom. their oppressors and the one- party structure will be on the trash heap of history, the same way president reagan said to tear down the wall and the evil empire would fall, the same
thing will happen to the chinese government. until that day america should always stand with the chens of the world. i think the chairman and i yield back the balance. >> thank you very much. i would like to introduce our distinguished -- we have six outstanding human rights advocates who are testifying today. i will begin with the pastor, bob fu, who is a leader in the 1989 student democracy movement and later became a pastor with his wife. authorities arrested them for their work. after their release they escaped to the united states in 2002. they found it china aid association -- they founded. china it monitors reports of religious freedom in china. the pastor is for coli interviewed by media outlets around the world and has testified that u.s. congressional hearings. i know that when chairman wolf
and i was in china on one of our major trips, we contacted fu who helped us arrange to meet with church leaders. in a kidding way, we are heading there to have a bad guy that said "human rights." -- we're heading there to have a banner that said, "human rights." within an hour, our embassy was contacted to set, he will be deported immediately if that happens. here is a man who is being watched and yet speaks out and has incredible context and said of china. sophie richardson is a chinese human rights director. a graduate of the university of virginia. dr. richardson is the author of numerous articles on political reform. she has testified for the european parliament and the u.s. senate and the house.
she has provided commentary to the bbc, foreign policy national public radio, the new york times, wall street journal, the washington post. dr. richardson is the author of china, cambodia, and five principals of coexistence. and an in-depth examination of the foreign-policy since 1954's geneva conference. including rare interviews with policy makers. we will then it here from the director for international advocacy. t. kumar. he has testified before our subcommittee on human rights. he has served as a human rights monitor and any countries as well as bosnia, afghanistan, sudan, and south africa. he has served as ships and the camps. -- he has served as directors of
ships and camps. he holds an advanced degree in law. he was himself a political prisoner for five years and the tree lot of for his peaceful activities. sri lanka. la he started his legal studies in prison and became an attorney and devoted his entire practice to defending political prisoners which is what he does now with amnesty. we will then hear from a human rights advocate to for a furniture business who recently fled to the u.s. to escape constant monitoring and harassment from chinese authorities following her ongoing advocacy on behalf of chen. xuezhen wang. wang attempted to visit him on several occasions and participated and advocacy
activities to free chen. there were beatings and constant monitoring. authorities detained her and her husband for two weeks in december 2011 as they were preparing to travel to participate in an activity to free chen. we will then hear from a blogger about china. yaxue cao. she grew up in china. her writings explore aspects of china's past and present with heavy emphasis on human rights and the rule of law including multiple pieces on chen. her posts have been quoted in length. including "the new york times." she had from contact with at least one member of his extended family after chen's state and has been reporting on the
family's situation. we will then hear from michael horowitz. director of the hudson institute and project for international religious liberty. he served as general counsel for the zero and be under the reagan administration. -- for the oomb. he has practiced private law as a partner at the national law firms. he has written on international issues and human rights topics. he holds a b.a. from city college in new york. he also went to yale law school. i will also note parenthetically that michael has been the genius behind many human rights initiatives that have found their way into law in the united states. the north corinne human rights -- the north korean human- rights act, and other initiatives. we will then hear from reggie
littlejohn. she is an expert on china's one - child policy. she has testified before the european and british parliaments in the u.s. congress. she has been interviewed on dozens of tv and radio programs and has spoken at harvard, stanford, george washington university, and the heritage foundation. she has issued several insights reports.ll reporsightful she is a graduate of yale law school, she has represented chinese refugees and their asylum cases in the united states. i would like to ask pastor fu if he would proceed. >> thank you.
your excellent staff. and i want to maybe ask you to submit my written version. >> without objection your full statement and any items you would like to affixed to it will be part of the record. >> thank you. i am familiar with the details of chen's escapes and was in contact with a team of people who helped him flee to beijing. i learned chen left his house on may 23. after he left the u.s. embassy i stayed in close contact with both the relevant u.s. government officials and people
who have been in telephone conversation with him. i have amassed a great deal of first hand information. and the developments that led to the current situation, which is rather shocking, regretting, heartbreaking, and disappointing. there are some important things that are confusing than it needs immediate clarification. first, according to the u.s. state department, he left the embassy of his own volition. however, according to my conversation last night with mr. chen and several media reports including firsthand information from his friend and
fellow lawyer and from the wife, the u.s. officials related and the threats made by the chinese side to threaten his wife. it was after learning of this threat to that chen was left with no choice but to reluctantly leave the u.s. embassy. much of the dispute between the account of the state department and the u.s. negotiators and chen's recount with the media, how to characterize that conversation on may 2 before chen walked out of the embassy relayed by the u.s. official. the message suggests -- let me
put it this way. he was parked by a u.s. official before he stepped out of the embassy. he was told it was a chinese government message that they want to go through the u.s. official. if he chose not to walk out on may 2, he will not be able to see his wife and children again. they will be returned to the village, the city that has been the hell for this family. according to my conversation last night, as i tried to verify what really happened,
chen said, after hearing that message, conveyed by u.s. official, his heart was heavy and he felt he had no other choice. but to walk out of the u.s. embassy. it was like a one-way street. either he stays in the u.s. embassy but facing a reality that his wife and children will be gone for maybe the whole life because he will not be able to see his wife and two children. of course, he did not know his had been treated whe-- when
chinese guards found he was missing. his wife was immediately taken to a criminal interrogation center where she was tied and beaten and threatened with life. the carrier told her that -- the her that ifterrogator told her husband did not walk out of the embassy, they will kill her. he learned about that after he had reunions with his wife. that was the second phase. i think that was clear to anyone with reasonable logic, that should constitute a threat. if that conversation occurred anywhere here, i think that
demands a 91 call. -- 911 call. what happened to his wife and their children. his 8-year old son -- whawas not able to be seen for two years. what happened to them in the past seven-years, this enormous torture and harassment and constant threat to this family in front -- their 6-year-old daughter -- his 80-year-old mother was beaten up, wounded and the government would not allow her to receive medical treatment. in front of a 6-year-old girl. i do not know that is a threat or not, but to me, after hearing what chen has told me
yesterday, i verified over the phone. i videotaped my conversation with him. i have a few questions i want to ask the u.s. chief negotiator or anyone -- who is the one really that relate information to chen. what is the wording from the chinese government? was the united states response initially to that message by the chinese government. why has he to walk on april 2? why that date? why is there no other option on the table offered to chen? for instance, why does the u.s.
embassy it not tell him that you have a choice you can stay. we can continue to negotiate with the chinese government to allow your wife and two dead children to come to the u.s. embassy so that you can have a safe environment to discuss your future. why does that have to be a one- way street? i think this question needs to be answered. i appreciate the ambassador and the administration officials who made the right decision on april 26 to allow chen to have six days' time of that freedom. but i do want to ask these questions. i certainly think -- some conversations were had yesterday
about how chen failed. he was treated or how much pressure he has received. i think i would reserve a later time to share. but the bottom line, yesterday he told me -- he said my wife and i feel in danger. we are left alone. we do not have anybody at present with us. even as late as 9:00, our six- year old baby girl was crying for food. we were suffering starvation the first nine after our guaranteed freedom. -- the first night. after somebody call the u.s. embassy apparently and somebody
intervened they went to the hospital and they were given some food. you can read that account in the very detailed description written by one of his first -- close friends -- his conversation over the phone about what had really happened during that night about their starvation. and secondly, i want to emphasize that he told me last night very clearly that he does not feel safe over there. he wants the united states to help him and his family to come out of china. of course, he did not use these exact words. in chinese, is called seeking
asylum or something in that nature. remember, he is still in china and his wife is not even allowed to walk out of the hospital. now his friends, they are allowed to visit chen. some of them showed up in the hospital and they were not even allowed to come close. so the hospital room that he and his family members are staying became another village in different form this time in the capital city of china. i it will call upon the u.s. government, especially, he specifically requested me again to talk about his requests to have a phone conversation with you.
it specifically ask that again. he said i want to talk with congressman smith. unfortunately, this morning a moment ago when we tried, the phone was powered off. we do not know what happened. he at least promised me he will keep it on if possible for a conversation today. i think president clinton -- i think secretary clinton, this is the moment to belabor. -- deliver. what you have promised, when you have repeatedly said in the past two years. she wants to see him and his family with freedom. as you are visiting a dialogue with their counterparts in china, this is the moment to deliver. i think he specifically made
that appeal to hillary clinton to help negotiate -- to re- engage with the chinese government and to allow them to have a safe exit. that is his appeal. i want to leave the rest of the time for questions. thank you very much. >> thank you very much for that incredibly and lightning and -- enlightening and passionate testimony. i would like to ask dr. richardson for her comments. >> mr. smith, mr. wolf, thank you for having this hearing this afternoon and for your extraordinary tenacious leadership on these issues. i think it is not an accident that chen wanted t to speak with you in particular. i want to start with one promise. if the chinese government was serious about their commitments
to human rights and the rule of law, we would not be having these conversations again and again and again, which is not to suggest we are not happy to have this conversation with you. but the fact that we are still discussing these issues is a powerful statement about the choices the chinese leadership has made with respect to political reform and the rule of law. to contain a broad picture, year -- to paint a broad picture, year in and year out we continue to document the gross abuses, restrictions on the freedoms of religion and assembly. i think his case in particular highlights some of the worst abuses we have seen in recent years. those include a naked disregard for the law both -- both with respect to challenge illegal practices and to hold people to account but also with respect to the treatment of him.
certainly, gross problems with respect to arbitrary detention, which we discussed extends to family members including very young children. i find this aspect of the story in particular outrageous. that children should be subject to this kind of treatment. torture and mistreatment in detention. we have heard credible evidence of the physical violence against chen and his wife. other family members and other associates. restrictions -- his ability to communicate with other people, people's ability to see him and report on what is happening to him. i think it is a very important point to remember that chen has
done nothing illegal. i think the bottom line is that all activists in china regardless of the issue they are working on remain extraordinary risks at all time. with respect to chen in particular, much depends on clarity about what he and his family want. if they do want to leave, which seems to be the view now, i think it is incumbent on the u.s. government to insist on access to him. we are disturbed by the reports in the washington post today that u.s. officials said not -- have not been able to have access to him for about 24 hours now. and i do not see any particular reason why secretary clinton or secretary died mayor and other -- secretary tim geithner and
other u.s. officials who are in beijing at the moment -- secretary geitner and other officials who are in china at the moment cannot have access to him. there is pressure to mount a monitory never with respect to -- a monitory effort with respect to his treatment, his family members treatment of a kind have never imagined before. there will have to be a new detail at the u.s. embassy. in the broader picture with respect to other activists and active as some in general, i think there is an enormous responsibility on the u.s. government on activists and other like-minded governments to watch incredibly closely, not just over the next few days but over weeks and months and years to monitor what happens to other activists who will suffer from further retribution by virtue of this incident. in particular, we know the
machine has already swung into action to place restrictions on people, some who are involved in this case and some who have nothing to do with this case. i think it would be a tremendous tragedy of the heightened awareness of human rights abuses in china were to fade when the spotlight shifts elsewhere after secretary clinton leaves town. i think that is all of our collective responsibility anin the near and longer term future. thank you. >> thank you very much. mr. kumar. >> thank you chairman smith. i am pleased to testify at this important and timely hearing. thank you for your leadership in promoting and protecting human rights not only in china and around the world. thank you both of you. today, what is happening in
china is not about this particular individual. this is about a system in china, which is geared towards abusing its own citizens with total impunity. we start with chen's case, years ago he was documenting abuses. the reason was, he was just documenting abuses and trying to publicize the abuses. so he was imprisoned for more than four years. during this time he was tortured and abused. when he was released, everybody thought it is going to come to an end.
but that is not the case. like many other cases in china, he was illegally detained in his house. and also he was being abused -- also, he and his family were abused as well. what happened about less than two weeks ago was that he escaped from the illegal detention. he ended up coming to the united states embassy. now, the situation is getting not clear. but one thing we know from the u.s. administration officials who made public statements that china gave certain commitments -- an agreement between china and the united states about the treatment of chen, i did not know the full context of that agreement. it is time the u.s.
administration makes it public. a real official document ought to be brought in. i urge the commission to release -- to request the official agreement between the u.s. and china on chen's treatment. on the context of that agreement, chen agreed even though there were reports that there were some issues involved, we have difficulty confirming it. he went to the hospital for treatment. suddenly we are hearing is that the same agreement that the united states and china agreed upon has been violated. and now, he is asking that he wanted asylum for he and his family to the u.s. the opportunity that is there for his case -- secretary -- it
is rare for the political prisoners. secretary clinton is there. u.s. officials are there. you have seen u.s. officials cannot solve this issue. the u.s. is having a direct relevance because the agreement that was signed, we have to ask a question. what can they do to get improvements and human rights issues in china? that draws to a bigger question about human rights in china and u.s. engagement in places. amnesty international is concerned. even though there are some meaningful improvements that were taken by different administrations, current dialogue that is taking place is not taking human rights as a
serious and equal partner to the dialogue. even the basic things like human rights dialogue, there is resistance. we do not know where the resistance comes from. the administration here or from the chinese. if they cannot even read them -- rename the dialogue, there is serious questions about the intention to does th's put additional pressure. that is coming into play today. secretary clinton should before she leaves make a public statement about what she intends to deal with his case. she should specifically mention about the agreement -- if there
is an agreement to bring asylum, what steps to read our opinion is when secretary clinton leaves, the interest will fall down. we were told that is not the case. but to make it clear, but secretary clinton make a firm stand and make a statement about this case. not only is this a human rights case, but this also directly involves u.s. and a case where they have an agreement. so let the u.s. stand up. let secretary clinton while she is in china stand up and make a clear statement. this will set the tone for future u.s.-china agreements or even china policing on promoting and protecting human rights in china. thank you again. >> thank you very much, mr.
kumar. >> if i can go from left to right, you're right to left. reggie littlejohn. >> thank you so much, congressman smith. thank you for inviting me to this. i have been asked to testify as to two things. one is, what is the underlying issue that got chen detained. the other one is, what about those who helped him, in particular -- it something that has been left out of discussion in a lot of mainstream media is, why is it that chen has been the subject of such intense persecution. what is it that set off the chinese communist party against him? it is a fact that he was -- he
was the one person in china who dared to stand up against the one child policy. he and his wife expose the fact there were an estimated 130,000 forced abortions and forced sterilizations and their city in one year. 2005. it was that act that got him detained. he spent four years in jail during which he was tortured, denied medical treatment, and now has been under house arrest. havemen's rights -- we obtained the field notes of chen guangcheng. we released those at a congressional hearing right here on december 6 of 2011. it is called the chen guangcheng report. it is 35 pages of the most horrific human rights abuses
that you can imagine. for example, a woman who was forcefully aborted and sterilized and seven months, the visitors that sleep in the fields to of they'd family -- to evade family planning officials who broke abram over the head of a man whose children is expected to violate family planning law. they were forced to beat each other because somebody in their family had violated the family planning birth limit. and then finally, the use of a quota system in the detention of family members and which if one person and a family is suspected of having violated the one child policy either by being pregnant or missing their cervical checkup, women are required to have cervical check ups between two and six months depending on where they live in china, the entire family can get
dragged in. there is one report of a person's extended family, their parents, grandparents, cousins, all being dragged in and tortured and find 100 yen on a -- fined 100 yen a da day for wt they call family planning learning class tuition. it is clear from the report that the spirits of the red guard is living on the in the family planning police today. this is the issue for which he gave his life to china. he gave his life to protect the women of china from forced abortions, forced sterilizations. infanticide. the other implications that come out of the policy are genocide, the select abortion of baby girls. 37 million more men and women living in china today.
it is driving him and trafficking and sexual slavery not only within china but surrounding countries as well. in addition, china has the highest female suicide rate of any country in the world. five larger women -- 500 women a day kill themselves in china. there is untold suffering in china because of the one child policy and this is the issue that chen had the courage to confront. this is also the central policy of the chinese communist party which is what they have targeted him so fiercely. some people might ask whether chen's report in 2005, whether these things are still happening. they are still happening. about three weeks ago there was a report, there was a photograph that came apart -- that came from the chinese equivalent of a twitter where a woman had been forcibly aborted
at the ninth month. the baby was born alive and was crying. the family planning officials took the baby and dumped it in a bucket and ground it. -- and drowned it. there is a picture of a drowned the baby in a bucket. that created outrage. i would also like to say, something people do not realize is the coercive birth lament is -- birth limit is violence not only against women but men as well. there are many instances where men were also detained and tortured. in one instance there was a farmer who had committed suicide because of the oppression. another report i have submitted, there is a woman -- there is a man who in 2008, his wife did have a second child. the family planning police came to get the fine from them. he said, please take the fine.
do not be violent about it. the refuse to do that. they started a fight and a broken bottle over his head. here is a picture of him with his temple that was crushed when the bottle was broken over his head. he is now permanently disabled. the second issue i was asked to address was the persecution of pearl. that is her pen name. she reached that to me about six months ago. she was running a free chen guangcheng campaign. campaign -- aes' sunglasses campaign.
she was doing get inside of china. we started e-mail in each other. we felt we were a sisters in this cause. she was the one that when he made his great escapes, she drove 20 hours and she disguised herself as a career, got into -- as a carourier, got into the village, and then drove him eight hours between beijing that. their plan worked so well he was not discover to be missing for four days. on the day he was discovered missing, she and i skyped on and off all night long. she was alone and afraid for him and his family. she was also afraid of herself. -- she was afraid for herself. at around 5:00 in the morning, there was silence. i found out later she had been detained. i am very concerned about pearl. i am concerned she may be tortured because she was the
head of this whole network that was to free chen. we know many instances in which key activists have been tortured in order for the chinese communist party to distract from them who were the other people in the network. i was -- in these discussions that they include pearl at all times. i appreciate how congressman smith and congressman will have been including her. he would not feel free until his main supporter from the outside is also freed it. -- is also free. thank you. >> thank you for that testimony. thank you for bringing attention to the underlying cause of why the full weight of the chinese government came down and for reminding the world that the concern we have to have for
her well-being. i now yield to mr. horowitz. >> thank you. last month, i was arrested in a respect full, non disruptive demonstration. what i call the china six. when the news came out, i sent an e-mail and said we are down to the china 5. he said soon it'll be the china 0. mr. chairman, we're back at the china 6. we are worse than we were. part of it is the failure of the administration when the incoming president of china was here to send a clear signal that the rights of these his heroic -- of the heroic dissidents represent party interests --
priority interests of human rights. where would the same the first. the real question is how could this have happened? i have often said that one of the great things we could do for the pursuit of american interests would be to replace the state department with the aflcio this is the issue of bargaining. anybody at the teamster union would understand that they are bargaining for the life and freedom them of such a growth hero. let me give three things. the first one things do is welcome this man to the embassy. and tell him you can stay as long as you want. take care of the client but much more importantly, send a signal to china that time is on our side. i was bargaining for the fire
offices eugene of york's city and i always thought about one thing. if the other guy needed to sign the deal, he was in my pocket. the chinese understood that as clearly as possible. he bargained on that score. we don't fix the verbal promises. you get some good faith action before you close the deal and turn over the house or what ever it is. or cut the deal. the first principle that anybody would say is ok, you want to do deals, bring his wife and child here. we do not even talk until she is there with him. that could have been done. and the most critical thing was not only to understand the risks that you and your client run, but to put yourself on the
other side and the risks that they run. anybody from any labor union would have said to the chinese, listen, we have all the time in the world. chen guangcheng has become the face of china. you spend time building goodwill in the u.s. and united states. every minute that this man and his family are at risk, it is destroying what ever it is you are building. the leverage you have will be trumped if you continue to let this case fastester. as long as it takes, it takes. he is comfortable. that is what happened with the pentecostals. they were so focused on our
needs, our risks, and not the risk and problems of the chinese that they just rushed the negotiation. even if i did not care one iota for human rights in china and all i cared about was the agenda of the secretary geithner is pursuing in his visit, i would be emphasizing chen guangcheng case because that is what puts china on the defensive. it is not our weakness, it is their weakness. ronald reagan understood that when he dealt with the pentecostal. as george shultz said, every time the russians wanted to negotiate nuclear weapons policy, he would say what are you doing about this? a winner they getting out? -- when are they getting out? when will they begin to understand that these dissidents
were not in the way of american policy but that they were for a policy. ronald reagan was able to negotiate a better deals on weapons and on dollar relations. if you focus on your weakness and do not understand the vulnerability of the other side, i get fired in your first week of the teamster union. these people who have been negotiation have held the life and safety. how sad it makes me. how sad it makes me at the sheer incompetence of the people. what do you do to protect this now? you have that chart up there that is an extraordinary charge. as soon as this happens, the chinese created blocks on the internet. the great freedom i guess we did better. if you type in the the word a"blind man" in china, you get blocked.
the problem with the stories about this that they convey a premise, a take away message to the american people that china has to control what they get to see on the internet. as you know, this is true only because of our horrible, misguided policies. we honor the intent in appropriations. we say, give this money to groups with a field tested capacity to bypass the internet firewall system. there are $30 million that was
appropriated years ago in state department accounts to tear down internet firewalls. there is a board of broadcasting governor sitting there with $800 million. they easily could have reprogrammed. justin% of their procreation -- just 10% of their procreation to scale up so they do not crash when 2 million users a day access the system. we have it in our capacity to allow 15 million chinese at any given second to search the word "blind man" anytime they want no matter what the bureaucracy says and we have not done it.
we have not done it in violation of clear congressional intent. we have not done that because we have not pushed the bureaucracy of the state department. there is one possible clue. when asked why one of the most successful programs has not received significant support by the washington post, the response was because if we gave them support china would go ballistic. the way to deal with this is sunlight, and information. all the policies are meaningless. he will be isolated. nobody will know what happens to him.
as nobody knows, as long as chen and blind man cannot be found out, he will be persecuted and isolated. is there will be taken. we have funds sitting in state department accounts. we can make it happen in two- three months. i hope one of the things that will come out, chen will regard every pain he indoors. let's come out of this a determination to get this administration to pare down the internet are well.
we have it within our means so that these kinds of things cannot be done within our ability so that you can broadcast to 50 million people within 10 minutes. let's honor this man and protect this man by tearing down the internet firewalls with priority determination. if we do that, all the suffering will not have been in vain.
thank you. >> thank you very much. thank you for your testimony and work. it is extraordinary. i like to introduce our next panelist. if you could proceed. thank you for being here. >> thank you. thank you and for having this hearing. this is what i know about chen guangcheng's case. last friday, i was on twitter and i had been falling because i work from home. -- falling because i work at home.
-- following because i work at home. i saw a tweet from china someone they found on the chinese microblog. that is nephewslashed officials and thugs with two knives. now he is on the run the tweet has a number. i grabbed the phone. when i did that, i did not expect to reach him. i thought i have lived here long enough that the police would have taken him already by now or he won't answer without knowing the source. but i find him. i find an agitated, scared young man in his early 30's.
i talked to him. he told me what happened. that is the night of the day when the guards and local authorities find chen guangcheng missing. he told me everything. i said "hold on, let me get my recorder." i want to get your words online. that is what i did. i did that. i recorded his message. he told me what he knew. within hours, i put it on the website.
i maintain this website with a group of friends,volunteers are doing this on their own. i pur the recording there. within 15 hours, i put a chinese and english transcription of the conversation. i forwarded it to of the media outlets. that is why the story is so quickly on the pages on international news. otherwise it was still be heresay. after the conversation, the next day i found out that the lawyer was able to find him. he was still on the run. that night when i talked to
him,he called immediately. two police bureaus andno police was coming. he was surrendering himself butno authority came to take him. then he was still at large. through his wife, sixlawyers quickly formed its. 18one of the lawyers contacted -- formed a team and one of the lawyers contacted a him. he was on the run. right now, we do not have any word from the chinese authorities. know what happened to them. is he in police custody? isn't the police responsible to find him?
-- isn't a government responsible to find him? for crying out loud, and he is innocent. and he surrendered himself. what happened? he feared for his life. he told his lawyer that the black car has been following him all round. he said he that he witnessed how his uncle's family was beaten before. from the chinese authorities,there is a response. the second day, one of the nine countries of the city, the -- counties of the city, official web site hosted a statement to or three sentences saying that
chen guangcheng slashd our officials with knives and is on the run. that is the entirety of the statement. we are trying to apprehend him. that statement made no mention of chen guangcheng and why this man, innocent man, slashed a whole bunch of authorities. no. that is the chinese government. that is the statement. from a reliable source, that is based in the u.s. the young man told me that his father who is eldest brother of
chen guangcheng, the thugs took him away that night. the night slashing happened after his father was taken away. this is in the hands of the authorities. his brother, his sister-in-law, his cousin, and a son of this cousin are in the hands of the authorities. that is so far what we know. i want to talk about the state in. 11 times i counted.
he mentions the word law. he was appealing to the law to defend him. another moment he was desperate. he was sobbing. he was shaking thathe did not believe the law would defend him. the conversation was long. if anybody is interested that can go to my website, www.seeingredinchina.com. i want to emphasize. he said,"i love my motherland but look what she gave me." she said "at the bottom of the society, this is so tragic." i also want to quickly give you my impression. after i talked to him, i can't
shake off his image. and the conversation we had. on one hand, he is just a villager. he is what the chinese official propaganda would like to call "low quality people, not suitable for democracy." i find him to be reasonable, good hearted, and intelligent. give it. -- he was speaking coherently under such a difficult situation. in other words,he represented the goodness of china like his uncle. on one hand,you have the good people represented by chen guangcheng. and by the nephew. on the other hand, you have this thuggish governments. where are we?
i am american. -- are we? when i say we, i say the u.s.. who are we spending with? -- who are we standing with? if you allow me, i am not listed to speak on this. i wanted to pick up on dr. richardson's speech. these are people who are living in china but have the technical sadness to climb the wall. --savvyness to climb the wall and are active on twitter. it is important to know the reactions after the left the embassy. over this belief at how this --
overwhelming this belief as to how this could have happened, overwhelming anger and betrayal. for 6 days, the us embassay, five characters are magic words for many chinese. china is a big country. the one island, safe haven, called us embassay were so overjoyed, so miraculous, and yet we dropped the ball so terribly. we allowed this to happen. i am not going to comment on how it happened because others spoke very eloquently.
we also have to remember and understand that what chen guangcheng represents for so many chinese, he went to the village, got robbed. got lost their jobs. lost their house afterwards and they were breathing such harsh punishment for doing nothing wrong. why? they love him. chen guangcheng as a blind man is a source of light. i mean this literally. he represents the bravery that is on short supply in china. he lives in the poorest village. he did not go to school until he was 18.
he is blind. a man? tell me. he is the symbol and the soul. for him, we must understand the larger picture. i am an ordinary citizen. my picture may not be the larger picture of our state department officials. the one-piece i saw in this larger picture may well be the most significant piece, which is china's pro-democracy citizens, whether they are outspoken are not our look upon the u.s. for support, if we fail chen guangcheng this is a horrible blow to the population.
that is our persecution for change in china for the better. we will suffer the pain for years and years to come. we will lose all credibility. from twitter? number one. a very straightforward --"the us betrayed us/" #two --"obama has no teeth." number 3 -- this is so recklessly cynical. number four --"now we cannot trust the us angry i am." "in 2012, the entire human race is unable to rescuse a blind man."
number 6 --"after i read the report by cnn, only the chinese themselves don't know what is going on." the last quote -- the this is by a very well-known canadian activist. he said,"the chen guangcheng case is a challenge for the us ideals and a test of american strength. if us gave up on protecting, it amounts to to giving up its leadership role in the world." down the road, and the face of terrorism and dictatorships,"the u.s. will never be able to stand straight up again."
she is based in canada. she is an activist and a journalist. that is what i am hear to say. i am happy to have said it. thank you for this opportunity. >> thank you very much. it is almost numbing to hear you say what other chinese individuals are saying online. that should be a wake-up call in itself. to the u.s. government and especially to this administration. i would like now to yield. [speaking chinese] >> i am very sorry. i cannot speak english. i will be using chinese through an interpreter.
[speaking chinese] ladies and gentlemen, good afternoon. i am here as a supporter of chen guangcheng. [speaking chinese] i have helped him and his family. it i hope they're telling you all about what has happened to me, it you will be able to get the real feeling for what he has been there in the past as
[speaking chinese] [speaking chinese] >> on august 26, 2011, i went to help chen guangcheng's daughter be able to attend the school that she should have been attending. i went with some other people. this trip was very much and good will. -- it in good will. we wanted to show the local government that we were coming in peace and goodwill. we decided to stay at a local secret. it was far from the county. they could see us. they were able to what us while we were sleeping. -- watch us a while we were sleeping.
we wanted to be very clear the only reason we birther comet the we were there, at the sole goal the school. we did not get a good results. there were 7-8 strong guys that are watching us all the time. there were several cars watching us. we did not make any progress. when we went to try to visit the family, we were met with violence. they pulled us out of the car. >> [speaking chinese] [speaking chinese]
[speaking chinese] >> on that same year, i went with an israeli journalist. i went to complain. nine we went to complain about the brutal treatment we had received. the night before that, if there were two women who also tried to visit. their heads were beaten. they were thrown in the woods. other than the government giving a warning, there was no nation at all for what they did. -- explanation at all for what they did. >> [speaking chinese]
>> on september 20, we went to the house of the fourth son in chen guangcheng's family. we went there to ask his daughter if she had successfully been able to go to the schools to supposed to be attending. six people rushed in. thee not able to carry out conversation at all. we had to leave the school supplies. we were followed by the car. >> [speaking chinese]
[speaking chinese] >> on september 21, we decided that one person should remain in the motel is staying at. the rest of us would go to this goal to see if there is any progress. our car was stopped. their read three men on motorcycles to were waiting for us. we left. we did not go into the school. we had not left for very long. we were pulled out of our car. the reporter that was with us was escorted away. the rest of us were taken to an old into a house on the
outskirts of the village. we were body searched in a very insulting way. we were beaten. we were taken to an old abandoned house. at night, we were taken to a police station and interrogated for stealing a cow. i refused to sign a statement that they prepared for me. i was sent back at 2:00 a.m.. i was in the police station being interrogated. at 5:00 a.m. i was home. on the 21st, let the person who had remained at the hotel, was also ordered the way. the political police stole a lot of possessions from us. i was there by noon.
i called some reporters. there were a political police that appeared and said me home. -- and sent me home. >> [speaking chinese] [speaking chinese] >> on the 20th of october, a journalist asked me to come for an interview. i want to complain about the treatment that i had received previously when i had been beaten and harass. the only thing was they handed me a form.
we're followed the entire way. then the county government answered our request. they said you can go see him. we were trying to get police protection and escorts. we cannot take our cameras. they slapped me very hard in the face. of. we were kicked out of the police station. the next day we met a japanese reporter. the political police appeared once again. they took our clothes and shoes off. they gave us a full body searches after we were completely naked. >> [speaking chinese]
[speaking chinese] >> i was working with a tv station helping them trying to cover this. that was the smoothest time trying to go and see chen guangcheng. i did not encounter too many problems because they're staying in a big city that was very far. with also taken out our cell phone batteries. we taken precautions even though we did that, the police worked through the police to investigate and interrogate me. >> [speaking chinese]
>> on the second of december, i arrangers several other volunteers to give them bolden's with the picture on them and several major cities and the process. we were in contact with each other. the contact itself was there. we were detected by technical means by the technology of the police. there was no due process reported with us. they searched the house. they beat my husband. we were both detained illegally for 14 days. for about 10 of those days, we were in our home town office which is part of the cadres school of the potential commission which is often used to put away political prisoners.
it is very dirty. there were four volunteers who kept their activities up they were also detained illegally. they insisted on the balloons-- the giftbags. legal. -- it was completely illegal. >> [speaking chinese] >> there are hundreds of people that have shown their concern. i should be considered one of the lucky ones.
everything that i have encountered is not nearly as violent as a lot of people have encountered. they have been beaten terribly. their skulls have been broken. i heard the story of a high school kid he was beaten in his genitals. i have had a lot of contact with reporters and i am a catholic. i'm not considered quite as egregious so i am not subject to it as others. >> [speaking chinese]
[speaking chinese] >> we can see what happens here when you have a brutal regime. they have no respect for the law. people'stopping on rights and the laws themselves. chen guangcheng and his wife have suffered more than i have. he himself is known all over the world for knowing what he did, standing up for other people's human rights. he is a father of two who is trying very hard to protect his family. what should be done that pows should we treat him? we need to show him -- what should be done at? how should we treat him?
we need to show him. with concrete actions, thank you. >> i want to thank the panel. call. he will be back in. i want to thank the panel. i wish every member could be here to hear it. i have a number of questions and observations i wanted to make. i want to thank the media. it is easy to criticize the media. if it were not for the media covering this story, every time she reference to it, it draws from somebody who was with care. i want to thank the media.
i also want to make it clear we appreciate the bravery of the chinese people. i hope they would know that the representatives of the state department in beijing do not represent the the point of the american people. there is a distinct difference. is a representative here today? from the state department? will you be getting this clinton? i understand she is there today and tomorrow. is that correct? i appreciate that very much. the other thing i would say, when i think of the words of ronald reagan when he said the constitution were a cabinet with the entire world, i think
president reagan were the president, the difference this would be -- can you at imagine what would be said by president reagan versus this administration? not come back in. i have been here since 1981. i see a direct parallel with what is taking place in china with the unraveling of the remaining government comment the activities of the chinese government are parallel. with the remaining in government. -- the romanian government. it is like they found the playbook and they did not realize what happens.
fell. i wanted to ask the question, of bob fu, can anyone explain the difference between the comment that i heard on the news yesterday that chen wanted to kiss secretary clinton if he could versus the reality? .es, ma'am was that a translation problem? >> [inaudible] >> i was on twitter and chen guangcheng had a ball friends. -- a phone conversation with one of his closest friends. she is the wife of one of the most prominent dissidents living in beijing.
chen guangcheng had a conversation am. she the phone call, when told chen guangcheng that he wants to kiss secretary clinton, he said that is not what i said. i said i wanted to meet him. in light of the past, at the time i thought how convenient. to make this mistake. significant. interpret. over the last two days, this does run over my head. did they pretend not to hear it?
i have heard some positive things. about ambassador locke. i oppose them to the ambassadorship. i was the one here opposed his confirmation to the ambassadorship. i told him so. he said i think you'll be proud of my activity. i heard very positive things about him. do you think this went south after people came from washington, that he was trying to do the right thing? others came out from washington and it went south? does anyone have any feeling? was he trying to do the right thing and then when washington intervened it went poorly? does anybody have a comment about that?
>> i think it was just written in the cards. i want to come back to my judgment. this was predictable based on the sacrifice of bargaining leverage and the absolutely inexcusably poor bargaining that took place. if it turned out that some of these people in the state department were pleased after the end of a verbal agreements where we indicated that we needed to get this thing wrapped up, so much more is a criticism. there may be cables that indicate whether it was good will or malice. i come back to the notion that anybody skilled and serious bargaining could have predicted the outcome of a negotiation that took place.
>> can you go into more of detail? i do not think he is that one. can you tell us why you think this would be important and how it should be helpful? to have secretary clinton and secretary brightener go to the hospital? i think it would be helpful. >> i think it is supposed to be immediate circumstances. i think with every hour that goes by when american officials do not have access, and the stakes go up. the washington post has been reporting that american officials have not had access
to him since they left the hospital. i think it is a moment that requires some fairly dramatic action. it demonstrates the gravity of the situation. we have made the point for a long time that until a much broader spectrum of government officials fight, the u.s. looks stronger and more coordinated. the broader group of diplomats raise these issues. in this particular moment when a very visible gesture is necessary to get things back on
the rails, to have and not just secretary clinton or ambassador lock, but you have a broader cross-section of the u.s. government officials to demonstrate the breadth of concern. we have asked for years thatall of the agencies that participate can be tasked with at least one human rights talking point. you never know who is sitting on that side of the table but i alsoi think this kind of coordination across the u.s. registers with the chinese side. the u.s. was any more poised to
demonstrate a broader commitment than it has been in the past. i think this is a great moment to set a new presidents. -- a new precedence. >> so this is a real test for the obama administration? >>a lot depends somewhat happens in the next 48 hours or so. >> i've written every official in the obama administration. i have asked them to go visit a house church, underground church, with a buddhist monk to visit. not one person has responded. ambassador kirk has refused to go to any house church or visit.
in all fairness, the bush administration did not visit either. i wrote the officials of the bush administration and they did not visit. this administration has failed and we will furnish, for the record, a letter we have sent. we will call the state department when i get back to my office and ask for secretary clinton to go and try to see chen directly. has the president or vice president of the united states, have they spoken out or would it be helpful to have the president go to the rose garden and go to the press abbas and speak out forcefully with regard to this issue over the next several hours? >> i think talk will not work
anymore. yes, i think it would be marginally useful but i think the chinese would interpret that for domestic political consumption only. action is very important. there are two things in that regard. the tweets coming out of china was a sign of weakness. the u.s. embassy was a bastion of resistance and they said they were sold out. the ironic part is that that will translate absolutely in the negotiations that secretary gunnar wants to do. -- secretary tim geithner wants to do. if we project weakness and surrender, they will accept that on every level in which they deal with us. i think that is a problem and the only response is something you have labored on.
when any member of congress -- with any member of congress, action counts. i think it is related to the protection of all the people caught in this tragedy. the united states needs to openly and robustly mount a commitment to tear down the fire walls so that kind of censorship that now takes place -- let 20 million, 30 million chinese type in the word "chen" and get it on their cell phones and we can do it in the two-three months. that is the response that will protect chen and his family but it will also send a signal to china that we're not a weak
country and we are not a surrender in country. a speech by the vice-president is politics and the chinese will understand that enable not affect them, in my judgment, at all. >> in the interest of mr. smith, i think what i will do is recessed the hearing briefly. so he can come back in. less recess for five minutes if we can. [no audio] [no audio]
>> the u.s. and chinese governments both reports that have forced the outlines of a deal and a diplomatic standoff over legal activist chen that would let him travel to the united states with his family for a university fellowship. the chinese foreign ministry says he may apply for travel permits to study abroad. the state department says american university has offered him a fellowship with provisions for his family and estate guarded as that the u.s. expects beijing to quickly process their travel permits after which u.s. visas would be granted. now more from yesterday's hearing.
my mother, my brothers. i want to know what is going on with them. thank you very much. >> you have a panel of people who have testified on your behalf to deeply care about you, your family, as well as those who have dealt you -- helped you. we're concerned about the woman who helped you escape, your nephew, your brothers. one person you just spoke about, her efforts to see you come and how she was mistreated including being stripped searched. the word is getting out and there are members of the national and international press here and in your case will
be the test of the chinese commitment to protect you. we were dubious of their assurances, but this is a test to the united states about whether or not human rights really matter. the secretary of state did not meet with you in the embassy, we asked her to go to the hospital and meet with you, and you come your family, and supporters need to come to the united states for that rest that you so richly deserve. [speaking chinese]
>> ok. thank you. thanks, bob, or setting up that phone call. that just underscores why we are here and why wouldn't will be-- why we would be unceasing. did you ask her question? mr. horowitz, if i could begin with you? i think he made an excellent point about the willingness to negotiate and be the last person standing, so to speak. your afl-cio analogy, i think, was a great one. i met with the pentecostal 7 when they were holed up in the
russian-u.s. embassy in moscow. we did stand steadfastly buy them and time was not the issue. i think your point was well taken, if you wanted to elaborate. i know the press has all laughed, but i think it's very important that the president of the united states speak out from the perch of the white house. it is amazing to me when asked about guangcheng chen that he said he had no comment. during the horrible days of apartheid when nelson mandela and others, if any president, reagan or bush, would have been asked about those individuals, yet no comment from the president.
your thoughts on that, if you could? the concerns we all have about the korean offense. time is on our side. finally, let me just say another great political leader was in moscow, the founder of the movement, and met with him in the early 1990's when the chinese wanted [unintelligible] but thought it they just gave him up that they would get the olympics. i happen to be in beijing. he made a statement that he repeated here when he was finally given freedom under a humanitarian scheme.
"you americans do not understand this. when you are weak, vacillating, and kowtowing, they beat us more. when you are tough, fair, transparent, say what you mean and mean what you say, they beat us less." he said that to me in beijing. right here in this very room he said, why do you not get that? why do not understand that you need to be tough? that message gets right down to their level and they beat us. and he was beaten for years. they have beaten this man for 15 years until the point he almost lost his life just like guangcheng chen. your thoughts?
>> he gave the example of president bush or reagan. i think the point is well taken. i would add president carter and clinton. when the visit took place, all four of those presidents would have met with the wives of the president's -- wives of the prisoners in the name of realism. he does not understand the point. the greatest witness who could be here is george shultz because the constantly tells the story of how the russian ambassador came to him and said every time they try to talk about serious matters that they are always talking about the pentecostal sect and refuseniks. they would think that he really
takes this seriously. ronald reagan, to make the point i have always thought, was president of the screen actors guild. he was president of a union. he understood their extraordinary power of these human rights issues delivering not only on human rights but on all the other issues on the agenda between the soviet union and the united states. that is a critical point. somebody told me what -- and you talk about the "hurry up" offense. i forget the formal title now, the chief lawyer of the state department? he was quoted by "the washington post" when asked of this agreement was not put in writing when it was released he said, "we did not have time."
mr. chairman, i hope that he will be called to witness. this is the dean of yale law school, a pretty smart lawyer. that is the shallowest justification or rationalization for throwing chen to the wolves. it is either small lens -- is either malevolence or a sign of disrespect. if this statement is true, and i do not know, he has forfeited his right to be the chief lawyer of the united states state department. imagine a lawyer -- my god -- you get disbarred for not putting an agreement in writing for a sale of goods and services.
hear, he had the well being of the united states, the reputation of the united states, the life and the safety of this great hero and he said what? "we did not have time to put this agreement to writing." that is malpractice. i believe i have every experience, so i want to ask you, mr. chairman, to get on that with all you have and find out whether this is true. get "the washington post" reporter to find out if it is true. if it is, he has forfeited his right to serve as chief lawyer for the united states state department. >> would anyone else like to comment?
>> what was the hard time deadline? what was driving this time guillotine if it was not withtary clinton's talk the chinese concerning trade? that raises further questions about whether chen was a bargaining chip. >> backwards. the fact that the chinese are on the offensive so acutely at this high level meeting is the reason that time was on our side, as any bargainer would know. drawing a way that leverage on the timothy geithner agenda is, in itself, and excusable incompetence. to raise this man's life and future over the issue of a timetable that was working on our side and against the chinese is just so hard to live
with, understand, and except when you hear this man speaking from the hospital room not knowing the fate of his life. >> one point he made just a moment ago in the earlier conversation before we broadcasted it, one of the points he made was that he was so grateful that the u.s. diplomats were working around the clock and without sleep. to which i said, "this can be seen another way. they want to get this done off of the table." without objection, i would ask to submit within the record, atm and square hero, among one of the most wanted, makes the claim -- a cnn man at square -
tainamen square hero says, "i watchedh im make his bid for freedom. did they mislead him talking about how this is an opportunity?" they talk about how he was "a fly to be swatted away." this is someone who has paid with her freedom and has endured a great risk. >> can i make another point about the treatment of guangcheng chen? i have dealt with clients that were facing a criminal charge.
there is a terror about one's family, one's self when you do not know what is going on. from all appearances, this time factor, this area up business only contributes to the ill at ease, the sense of isolation, the sense of vulnerability. the first thing you do with a client out there is to sit them down, take it easy, have a cup of coffee get a good night's sleep. that is also representation 101 when dealing with someone like that and they have gone in the opposite wrong direction in dealing with this man. >> mr. chairman, i wanted to let the committee know that i spoke with the secretary's office and spoke with fogarty saying you
had been in conversation with chen and he made a request that the secretary visit him in the hospital. i asked mr. fogarty get the word to the secretary immediately and he said that he would. >> thank you. you've only been here in the united states for about one month. you talked about the depredating treatment that you endured. i think the western world and the american public needs to be fully aware of just how vulnerable everybody else is to have aided and assisted chen all the more reason why we
underscored these points and about why her case is so important. if you could elaborate on what others may face? before you go, mr. horowitz? >> somebody just passed this to me and i think i ought to read it. again, i am told that there is a news story in "the washington post" quoting a u.s. official that they "had to elave chen alone and leave the hospital because officials told them visiting hours were over." once again, in your examination of state department officials, i hope that that will be high up on the list and that the official that said that or any
official who justifies it will have to sit here on this witness table and justify conduct of that time. talk of a leading man alone and all marble. being certain that would be the outcome, that visiting hours are over and they leave him in the hands of security, police, and the television cameras that have been installed? excuse me for intervening, but i just got this message. this is something that i hope the committee will investigate and put any official responsible for this. >> indicated to us that the embassy has been unable to get back to his room to visit with him, ascertain his well-being so the talk of a durable solution
is that he would be safe in china. there's no safety for any dissidents in china. it just does not exist. >> the point is they were there. if they can get in a room, they have already been kicked out, but it is pretty hard for the chinese to forcibly eject an american official that has given the full faith and credit of the united states that he will feel protected. why did they not say that, mr. chairman? that is the relevant question. >> hospital or police station, it is a distinction without a difference. the hospital is crawling with police. did you want to answer the question? i think it is under appreciated by some the risk that you
personally undertook coupled with the risk that you carry today. [speaking chinese] >> as a supporter of guangcheng chen, there are people from all walks of life that support him. a lot of people have a face to greater risks and dangers that i have myself, for instance government workers, the people
working for government enterprises or other companies. some of them as a result, their families have been talked to and harassed. they come and check their books to get them on financial crimes. >> [speaking chinese] >> then you get some teenagers who would went to see guangcheng chen, and as a result they went to talk to their parents and the kids were beaten. they could not understand what was possibly going on. there was a lot of emotional
damage done to the kids as a result of that. >> [speaking chinese] >> i am married. my personal life has not been dealt with in such an exaggerated manner. if she had a boyfriend, let's say, there would be a lot of personal attacks on her life. that has also been quite an emotional toll. >> [speaking chinese]
they do know of cases where cameras and other equipment that would have been used to document have been taken away. >> [speakign chinese] -- [speaking chinese] >> a lot of us have tried so hard. is this is what it has come to, this is something i cannot accept. i really hope the media from all over the world will stand up,
rise, and beat-up in the face of this. we owe him this. we want to know that this was not in vain, that it was worth it. we want him to be doing better. >> are there any comments to be made? yes. >> one of the good things the supporters inside china who visited or did something concrete to account of their experiences. still, there are groups dedicated to doing justice. they pass this as quickly as possible and then within
minutes it will be riposted, that kind of thing. i particularly want to point out two occasions that have left a deep impression on me. these are two employers -- that were employed by the chinese estate until they tried to visit guangcheng chen. he was a local regional reporter based in the current and products -- hunan province. he went to visit as a private person. he was not a representative of an organization. just like any others, he was
broadcom his money taken away, his cell phone taken away. he was beaten badly. -- he was beaten. he was sacked with a black cloth over his head and pulled into a van. then they threw him out in the open and he managed to come back. as soon as he returned, his organization fired him. there is another reporter. it just occurred to me that it does not happen because of this, but let me quickly account this. he is a reporter with the english version of the global times. his name is tommy nguyen.
he had the guts to run a report on this disappearance and then the reporter disappeared for 18 days. his family did not know where he was. there are these sorts of things. >> would any of you like to conclude with a final comment? mr. wolf? i want to thank you again for sharing your extensive expertise, your passion for human life, and deep concern for guangcheng chen, his wife, and family. we will continue this effort. i'm going to reapply for another piece of, which has been turned down since october.
i would love to meet with him and his family. most importantly, i want to hold the administration for account for what they may and may not have done. i think the questions posed by you need to be answered and we need to take it with a grain of salt when he gushes with gratitude for efforts being made on his behalf. i think we have dropped the ball significantly. i have been in the business of human rights for 32 years. my first trip was to moscow in 1982. as i mentioned earlier to mr. horowitz in his mentioning of the siberian seven, the pentecostal christians met with them, we stood firmly, unambiguously, with those sprouting freedom and democracy saying we were in solidarity with them. we risked superpower confrontation with the release
and freedom of the soviet jews that were being horribly beadetn in moscow. we need that same fire in the belly of the white house. i find it appalling that president obama had no comment guangcheng when comment chen. he should h-- bno comment about guangcheng chen. he should have gushed about these, the forced abortions and sterilization. we should not facilitate his loss of freedom, which there appears to be. there are good people that have tried to find a way out but the timing issue remains very troubling and it has been the topic in the dialogue. what is the use of having a
dialogue if you're not going to link human rights with it. why should we trust you on intellectual property rights if you so maltreat your own people? this commission will stay focused on chen, and we will not rest until he, his family, and his friends are free. we are adjourned. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012]
like china has indicated that guangcheng chen will be able to study abroad. he remains in a guarded hospital ward but the state department says he has been offered a fellowship at the american university in cable expedite travel documents for chen, his wife come and children. the government picked up 115,000 jobs. the their department reporting the unemployment rate fell to 8.1%, the lowest in three years, but the long-term unemployed, those out of work for 27 weeks or more, was little
changed. that group is more than 40% of the jobless rate. the libertarian party selected presidential nominee this weekend. they will hold their convention in vegas. they are celebrating their 40th anniversary. live coverage starting at 9:00, a two hour debate between the candidates. president obama and first lady michelle obama go on the campaign trail tomorrow. he starts in columbus, ohio, for the first of the obama for america campaign rallies. that is 12:55 p.m. eastern on line. the second stop will be live on c-span at 4:35 p.m. eastern on the campus of virginia commonwealth university. sunday on "q&a." >> i do not as regard this as
the biography lyndon johnson. i want each book to evaluate a corner political power in america. this is a kind of political power, seeing what a president can do in a time of great crisis. how he gathers all around, what does he do to get legislation moving? that is a way of examining power in a time of crisis. i said i wanted to do this in full. i suppose it takes 300 pages, so why i examined this. >> on "the passage of power," volume four in his multi-volume biography of lyndon b. johnson. this sunday at 8:00. the second hour of our conversation sunday, may 20th. the national urban league released its report on the state of black america focusing on voter participation in the
african-american community and new laws in 34 states that the urban league says it more difficult for americans to vote. they say many of these are disguise the voter suppression tactics. the urban league president was a panel discussion with community activists and lawyers. >> before we began our panel, a lot me offer some remarks for this year's state of black america. i want to thank the howard university community, the staff, at the faculty, and students and alumni. [applause] let me mention the howard university alumni club who are watching this event at the university. let's give them a big hand.
we want to thank the xavier williams and at&t. at&t has been a strong supporter of the national golden league. it is the second year in the row. let's give at&t -- [applause] i want to thank tonya who works very closely but us. let me say how stimulating, how powerful it has spent this week with urban leaguers to have been here on capitol hill. with the department of education, housing and
development. services carrying the message of empowerment. board members and young professionals, give yourselves a big round of applause. [applause] since 1976, the national urban league has anually presented the state a black america. this report began when former president vernon jordan watched president ford present his state of the union in the mid- 1970's. in that state of the union
address, he did not mention urban. he did not mention black, poor people or there concerns even once. so vernon jordan said if he will not do it, he will. we have presented this report which is called the state of black america. friends and colleagues, when we talk about the state of black america, we are talking about the state of the nation. [applause] as black america and urban communities go, so goes this nation. we are indispensable a and inextricably wound in bound together as a single nation here in the 21st century.
each share we ask what is the stake of black america? -- each year we ask, what is teh state of black oamerica? i must report that the state of black america is that we are under attack. we are the quality of education. how is the quality of education under attack? when tens of thousands of schoolteachers are laid off in school district after school district, in cities across the nation, and the quality of education is under attack. when 10% of the people control 2/3rds of the net worth, when unemployment has skyrocketed to nearly 14%, 15%, economic
equality is under attack. in 2012, the right to vote is under attack. democracy is under attack. why is democracy under attack? let us walk back to 1890. poll taxes, literacy tests, and comprehension tests were launched in an effort to keep newly freed slaves from participating fully in the election process. the grandfather clause, when
these were taken together, a state that in the 1880s had a black governor, there were only 750 black men on the voting rolls. indeed, i spoke to my mother. 1953, she returned to new orleans a graduate of boston university. she had been a classmate of dr. martin luther king. she went down to the voter registration office. [phone ringing] [laughter] mother. [applause]
she went down to the voter registration office to present herself to register to vote. the registrar looked at her registration card and said what color are your eyes? she said, as she had placed, "my eyes are brown." the registrar looked at her and said "no, your eyes are black." she said "no my eyes are brown." my mother refused to leave. the registrar return 15 minutes later and she was allowed to register to vote. the point is, the indignity and
the harassment, the gamesmanship and the difficulty place in the way of people prior to the voting at this something we must be reminded of. in 2012 we are witnesses to an avalanche of new voting laws in 34 states across the nation. new voting laws would seek strict but no identification requirements, restrict early voting. new laws that make it difficult for people to carry out voter registration. we ask a simple question "why and why now?" why and why now is there this
new avalanche? we say it is an attack on democracy. we say that these new voters oppression loss is something we must collectively recess. -- laws is something we must collectively resist. we believe they can impact the voter registration of 5 million voters across the nation. recently, i am proud that a circuit court judge in wisconsin signed an injection of earlier this week to prevent the wisconsin voter i.d. law from taking effect. just yesterday. [applause] in the state of ohio, 86
years old, he paid someone to drive him to the polls. when here bribes comment he took out his veterans identification card -- when he arrived, he took out his veteran identification card and was turned away by the pull commissioner there who said that the veterans identification card did not meet the new stricter requirements of ohio law. ladies and gentlemen and colleagues, this a voter suppression law is going to affect african-americans. it will affect senior citizens of all races.
young people of all races. case in point, in the state of texas, led the voter i.d. law allows one to use a gun ownership permit as proper identification but says that and id by the university of texas is insufficient. what message does that say to young people? what message does that send? a voter suppression, there is a chain of evidence. bob ehrlich, a former governor of maryland, said that suppression of boats is a -- of votes is a desired outcome. we want to create confusion, frustration, and dampen enthusiasm. tom corbett, at the governor of
pennsylvania, said we must keep the boat in philadelphia below 50 -- vote in philadelphia below 50%. later on, he had cut $860 million from the budget for public education. ladies and gentlemen comment that is why tonight the national urban league is announcing our occupied the vote campaign. [applause] we must oppupy -- occupy the vote. if we're going to have a voice on education in schools and teachers, we must vote. if we're going to have a voice on economic equality, jobs, policy, workforce policy, we must vote.
if we're going to have a voice on this new discussion about what the plan for america is going to be to build a 21st century economy, we must vote. not only must we vote, we must resist efforts in 2012 to enact these voter suppression laws. 7 states have enacted these voters oppression laws. i am proud that the attorney general and the division as several rights refused to pre- clear south carolina's both your id log -- voter id law. [applause] we will join in encouraging that the department of justice refused to pre-clear any voter id law enacted by any state. our voice must be strong and
unyielding. we must occupy the vote not to vote because it is the right thing to do, but because we want a voice. college students at howard university are facing increasing costs, increasing challenges to affordability. young people who are fishing colleges are finding difficulty in jobs -- who are finishing colleges are finding difficulty and jobs. we must occupied the vote so we
have a voice. the urban league is launching its on-line election center. this on-line election center that you see on the screen will be a comprehensive place where you will be able to learn about the boating laws in your state. tonight before we start the panel, i want to introduce your to several people. -- we must occupy >> the vote. >> i want to introduce you to several people.
i want to introduce you to these people who have been helped by the urban league affiliates across the nation. we have to be those that connect the dots. this is some cases with private dollars. this is good for investing in people. i am proud to introduce someone he met during lunch, and jasmine griffon. where is she? stand up. [applause]
she joined the digital connectors program last fall before she enrolled in those problem. -- programs, she was not involved in any extracurriculars. she participated in the female institute, and she is going to be a businesswoman and an entrepreneurs. put your hands together for jasmine griffon. [applause] our next speaker was homeless when he joined the program. he joined the project ready program. that program helped him identify scholarship
opportunities, financial a document, and determines the college in programs that best matched his interest and career aspirations. he is now a student at the delaware state university. [applause] he was a centennial youth speaker in 2010 right here in washington. where is deborah? is she in the audience? we are going to give them a big hand for making a difference. thank you. [applause] finally, we have carol perkins. carol perkins is a graduate of the mature workers program at the urban league of essex county in the work, and new
jersey. -- in newark. i am happy to report that because of the workers program, carol found at a filling full- time job after nearly four years of unemployment. through the program, she was able to refine her job skills and learn new skills that resulted in a brand new career opportunity. she is here with the president and ceo of the urban league of essex county. vivian cox frasier. let's give them a big round of applause. [applause] jasmine and carol are what the urban league movement is all about. some people and organizations talk a big game.
they are talk tanks. some produce fancy position papers. i respect fancy position papers. but they produce fancy position papers and we call them think tanks. then the urban league is on the ground, in the community, it beat in the street, and helping people like jason, raykwan and carol. we are a "do tank." let's put our hands together for the doers, the achievers. stand up one more time. we're going to give you a round of applause. [applause] [applause]