tv U.S. House of Representatives CSPAN August 15, 2013 10:00am-5:01pm EDT
this photograph from the "wall street journal." the opinion piece i read earlier. just gives you one sense, one insight into what's happening inside cairo. these are security forces confronting a supporter of president morsi. again all of this unfolding yesterday in and around the streets of cairo. want to get your calls and comments. it's the top of the hour. and if you're listening as well on c-span radio, give us a call a 202-585-3881. our line for republicans. 202-585-3808 for democrats. and a line for independents, end us an email at journal @c-span.org or send us a tweet at c-span wj. caller: thank you very much for taking my call. i wanted to make a comment on secretary of state's press
conference yesterday and the press briefing that followed. the entire tone and tenor was that somehow this was our fault. i don't understand why it is we own this problem. they have been fighting each other over there for centuries. why is it all of a sudden america's fault? and i couldn't agree more with the previous callers that say we should not give any more money to any nation that behaves this way. detroit is bankrupt. sacramento, california, is bankrupt. we have huge, huge problems over here as far as infrastructure. i think we should take care of our own. i'm a first generation american and i can tell you, these countries, we give money -- they don't share our values, they don't share our beliefs, they don't have the same respect for human life that we do. we have absolutely no business giving them our money. i thank you very much. hubie: thank you, shane. from maryland. our next caller from ports myth,
howe. good morning. caller: good morning. i enjoy your program here. just a quick comment about what's going on in egypt. people don't realize that they it -- america a pretty much put the president there before, and they lived under, generally, what america -- with freedom. now they have this muslim brotherhood guy who came in here and tried to slowly bring back shari'a law to this country. they'll people are very, very upset about this because they want their freedom. they don't want morality police running around. they don't want any of this crap. that's why they want this president out of here. now you have a few of the -- there's supporters that's been on his side and they are upset because they are very, very devout muslims. there is not a problem with that. but these people want their freedom. they want to be free to dress how they want.
they want to be free to come and go as they please. they want to be free to go to a bar and have a drink. they want to be free to go to a club and go dancing. the muslims do not believe in this. so, therefore, there is going to be a great unrest, much like there is in this country. we have a divided country because of similar policy. until people are able to come to a general aagreement of freedom, what freedom really is, there is always going to be a dispute amongst nations of population. hubie: thanks for the call from ohio. this photograph which has been getting a lot of play overnight shows one vehicle falling over a bridge just outside the main center of cairo. jacob is joining us next from champaign, illinois. good morning. caller: good morning. i'd like to comment on the disturbances in egypt. i think this is closely related
our country has failed to understand what the true science of democracy even -- signs of democracy even is. thomas jefferson, benning lynn fringe lynn, and george benjamin -- frank -- franklin, george washington, mainly it's based on the bible peace under jesus christ, as a metaphor between the egyptian nation and israelite democrats. our country has failed to get up to speed and understand the science of the holy grail which is based upon peace between the two parties, between the reds and blues. our democracy is broadcasted across the entire world. so when our country cannot get it together and understand peace
between two parties, the disturbances are felt across the globe. i just think it really -- after eight years of george bush and after eight years of barack obama, our country is going to have to reassess what peace between the two-party system is and what it's going to take to rebuild this nation. hubie: thanks for the call. front page of "usa today" has the headline, egypt erupts in bay kaye yoss. more details into exactly what happened. police, backed by armored vehicles and bulldozers yesterday, sweeping through two camps of supporters of out ofed president muhammad morsi, sparking street balancesles in cairo and other cities. again more than 500 civilians killed in the demonstrations yesterday. well over 3,500 injured. and from reuters there is this this morning, egypt's muslim brotherhood today saying it would bring down the military coup but test is remain committed to peaceful struggle.
government forces broke up its protest camps. the crackdown yesterday defied western appeals for restraint and peaceful settlement to egypt's political crisis. following the removal of morsi, prompting internation statements of dismay and condemnation. that this morning from reuters news. next is awan joining us from zoig, independent line, good morning. caller: good morning. the greatest problem of all is that the united states government made this happen. they wanted this to happen. they wanted the radical muslims to come in and take over the middle east. the united states government has created the greatest horror of all, the state of israel, which they have no right to. and the state of israel belongs to russia. russia is the state of israel as they control this government as well. our government cannot talk against israel. if they do, they will be dismissed from the government.
hubie: from san diego, another photograph this morning, front page of "usa today" below the fold. egyptian forces standing right next to the protesters, and these protesters, their hands above or next to the head, and the police armored with tear gas and other supplies directly behind them. more photographs available online from "usa today."com, "washington times," "washington post," "new york times," among other news organizations. james is joining us on the democratic line from new york city. good morning. caller: good morning. i'd like to share my thoughts. one of your callers said things change when president kennedy was shot. and that was the truth. that as a nation it was republican motivated. the republicans at the time were gain in theirrity recognition as humans to be able
to vote. and republicans, especially in the south, were afraid that blacks were going to be -- don't know what to do with their voting power, were going to take over. so they came up with this vietnam war. there was a lot involved. what i'd like to focus on is the government, the republicans never stop fighting the civil war. when they lost on the battlefield, they took it to the offices of government and sought to win the war from within. i believe they have been fighting that war ever since. and that the democratic party has been infiltrated by republicans because -- for the president of the united states to invoke legislation where people can be held without any judicial process and stuff like that if they are suspected of being terrorists is outrageous. that legislation was an act of treason against the people of the united states. basically also one of the callers was saying about american money being sent overseas, that is ridiculous.
i believe a lot of that money something channeled into the pockets to the people sending it over here. hubie: from mary there is this comment on twitter. revolutions never easy. the people in egypt deserve the space to have theirs without meddling from the united states. egyp forces kills scores of protesters. the president in about nine or 10 minutes -- when five or six minutes if all goes as scheduled will have a statement. he'll be speaking to the white house press corps. the pool of reporters and photographers gathering at martha's vineyard in massachusetts and we'll have audio of the president's comments coming up at about 10:15 eastern time on c-span television and c-span radio. and the video will be fed in later this morning. we'll have that as well. we'll also post it on our website at c spafment.org. the death toll, more than 500 killed yesterday. 3,500 injured. diana is joining us from warren,
michigan, on the republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. i just want to say that this really breaks my heart to hear of this. no one can win. if one person ever dies. it can never be of any been fit to anyone -- benefit to anyone if somebody else dies. trust in money -- you can't buy trust. you can't give money to buy their trust. people feel a better sense of accomplishment when it's earned. everybody wants to be the chief. nobody wants to be the indian. here you have people over there don't mind staying there, they don't want to move over here, and yet everything that they worked so hard for many a years to build is being destroyed. that breaks my heart. that really breaks my heart. i don't think we should be giving them money because that's not what they want. what they want is peace and to be left alone and have nothing to do with america. i think that they should just be allowed to live free, too. but we have nothing to do with
their business. their life. the way that they live has nothing to do with american ways. we should just leave them be. thank you. hubie: thanks for the call. again scenes from yesterday in the streets of cairo. adel is joining us from lanham, maryland. independent line, good morning. caller: thank you. a comment about a couple of the calls you received. the muslim brotherhood is not a violent organization. over 85% of the members are intellectuals, engineers, and university professors. with many other parties, the brotherhood have been peacefully demonstrating for six weeks. our mments, i believe it government must support democrat graphically elected government
and president. our government should not support any regime that kills its own peaceful demonstrating people in three different massacres. our government must suspend aid to egyptian military. i'm hoping president obama will mention this today. thank you very much. hubie: thanks. jason has this, we need to close our global checkbook and redirect that spending at home. join in on the conversation at facebook.com slash --/c-span. egypt has been at war with itself for centuries, according to obama haters, this fight is all his fault. if he had not been supporting the muslims, this never would have happened. so what is a legitimate solution for the north african area of the world is, i have no idea and neither does anyone i have heard spewing misinformation and lies from c-span. another viewer says, if we want to give money to countries, then go through the red cross.
that from our twitter page. lucy from newark, new jersey. good morning. thanks. caller: good morning. hubie: you're on the air. o ahead, lucy. lucy, still with us? caller: i'm with you. ost: we loves your connection. caller: a small fraction came out, camped out for six weeks, then they used molotov cocktails, guns, they fired at the police first. at the square. and became very violent. they even started bombing churches and killing innocent christians. people are not talking about what is being done to the christians. and the human rights that have been failing in egypt all along.
we need to really explore that. we need to protect the christians in egypt. and we need to come up with a plan of diploma sti to ensure that egypt -- diplomacy to ensure egypt remains democratic. host: thanks for the call. liz is next. college park, maryland. hartford courant, egypt erupts. good morning, liz. caller: good morning. i actually lived in egypt. and i have lived in other countries where shari'a law is enforced and i'm going to tell you that the people there don't like it. if you talk to them on a one-on-one basis they hate it. it's just that their parents and older generation support it because they don't want their children dressing quote-unquote, immorally. it's really terrible. i'm going to be honest with you. you have fully grown men, police officers, walking around in the streets with whips, whips, and
they get to decide what is an immoral dress for a woman. and you get whipped, beaten in public for wearing pants or wearing a shirt that has short sleeves or showing your ankles or anything else that could be interpreted as immoral. and the people don't like it. i'm going to be honest with you. they don't like being beaten. they don't like these things happening. but as soon as you get them out in front of a camera, they change their minds because they don't want to be viewed by the clergy as immoral. they don't want to come off as these immoral people. if people would just be honest to themselves about the shari'a law, then it wouldn't be there anymore. thank you for letting me comment. host: liz. thank you. from gene who says we need to get out of -- get out and stay out of egypt. we also need to protect the suez
canal. this is another angle of that photograph that i showed you earlier. you can get a better sense what was happening. this is along the october bridge which is in cairo. it's a police vehicle being pushed off the bridge by protesters, supporters of president morsi. it's accompanied by this storery, crackdown draws censure and silence and a time line of what happened since july 3 when president morsi was forced out of office. and the demonstrations yesterday that killed more than 500. next is maja joining us from midlothian, virginia. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you so much for having this program. i have to say -- i am egyptian born and raised in cairo but lived in the states most of my life. i have a couple of comments to make. first of all you keep putting pictures that show the muslim brotherhood being attacked by
the military. you didn't put any of the pictures where the muslim brotherhood are killing these soldiers. where they are destroying the country. till now they had burned 14 churches. destroyed two of the biggest christian bookstores. all over.ttacking one of your callers shared that egypt needs to have human right people come and take care of the christians. one point, and i think everybody should be aware of, is that politics a really complicated. we do not know a lot of things, and i think we understand that, but think of it this way, why dot americans keep supplying gypt with military aide, although they -- egypt is the only country that signed a peace treaty with israel.
and we shared a border. when egypt is calm it's strong because we can help israel whether we like it or not. now i lived in the states for long enough and i have chosen to have roots in the states, and as an american woman i really do not think we should be giving money to other countries when we need it more. some of your callers talk about homeless people, the education needs a lot of help, look at the roads, schools. he americans need the money. it the egyptians, the majority, do not want the american aid. host: thanks for the call from midlothian, virginia. the president was scheduled to speak to reporters about 10:15 eastern time. that was about 3 1/2 minutes ago. he is running behind schedule. we'll have a live audio feed of the president's comments and bring that to you when it happens. then the pool will feed what is the president's comments on video later this morning. we'll also have it on our
website at c-span.org and hear it on c-span radio as well. these will be the first comments by the president since the uprising yesterday. he's been at martha's vineyard for the last couple days. scheduled at the moment to stay there until next sunday. you can check out all of our scheduling information on our website at c-span.orga reminder we'll be back tomorrow morning for a friday edition of the "washington journal." heard live every day at 7:00 a.m. eastern time. 4:00 for those on the west coast. c-span's coverage continues both from the president's comments on egypt and elsewhere on the c-span networks. enjoy the rest of your day. >> again we are awaiting remarks from president obama this morning on the situation in egypt. where vie violence between supporters of morsi have slashed with the country's military and police squads. over 500 people have died. thousands have been injured. and more confrontations are taking place today. president obama expected to make a statement live from martha's
vineyard where he's vacations this week. yesterday the house released a statement strongly condemning the violence in egypt and the emergency law that's in place. again we'll get audio only of the president when his remarks begin here today. his first statement on the situation in egypt. outside of the statement that was released yesterday. then about half an hour we'll also have the video which we'll play back for you later today. yesterday secretary of state john kerry held a briefing on the rising that took place and the administration's response. >> sorry to keep you waiting, folks. ll make a statement and then
ben will stay and take questions and brief everybody. the united states strongly condemns today's violence and bloodshed across egypt. it's a serious blow to conciliation and the e-- egyptian people's hopes for democracy and inclusion. in the past week at every occasion, perhaps even more than the paths week, we and others have urged the government to respect the rights of free assembly and free expression and we have also urged all parties to resolve this impasse peacefully and underscored that demonstrators should avoid violence and incitement. today's events are deplorable. and they run counter to egyptian aspirations for peace, inclusion, and genuine democracy. egyptians inside and outside the government need to take a step
back. they need to calm the situation. and avoid further loss of life. we also strongly oppose a return to a state of emergency law. and we call on the government to respect basic human rights, including freedom of peaceful assembly and due process under the law. and we believe that the state of emergency should end as soon as possible. violence is simply not a solution in egypt or anywhere else. violence will not create a road map for egypt's future. violence only impedes the transition to an inclusive civilian government, a government chosen in free and air elections that governs democratically, consistent with the goals of the egyptian revolution, and violence and continued political polarization will only further tear the egyptian economy apart and prevent it from growing,
providing the jobs and future that the people of egypt want so badly. the united states strongly supports the egyptian people's hope for a prompt and sustainable transition to an inclusive, tolerant, civilian-led democracy. deputy secretary of state burns, together with our e.u. colleagues, provided constructive ideas and left them on the table during our talks in cairo last week. from my many phone calls with many egyptians, i believe they know full well what a constructive process would look like. the interim government and the military, which together possess the preponderance of power in this confrontation, have a unique responsibility to prevent further violence and to offer constructive options for an inclusive, peaceful process across the entire political spectrum. this includes amending the constitution, holding
parliamentry and presidential elections which the interim government itself has called for. all of the other parties, all of the opposition, all of civil society, all parties also share a responsibility if to avoid violence and to participate in a productive path towards a political solution. there will not be a solution through further polarization. there can overwhelm be a political solution by bringing people together with a political solution. so this is a pivotal moment for all egyptians. the path towards violence leads only to greater instability, economic disaster, and suffering. the only sustainable path for either side is one towards a political solution. i am convinced from my conversations today with a number of foreign ministers, including the foreign minister of egypt, i am convinced that that path is, in fact, still
opened and it is possible, though it has been made much, much harder, much more complicated by the events of today. the promise of the 2011 revolution has simply never been fully realized. and the final outcome of that revolution is not yet decided. it will be shaped in the hours ahead, in the days ahead. it will be shaped by the decisions which all of egypt's political leaders make now and in these days ahead. the world is closely watching egypt and is deeply concerned about the event that would be witnessed today. the united states remains at the ready to work with all of the parties and with our partners and with others around the world in order to help achieve a peaceful democratic way forward. jen will be happy to answer any questions, thanks.
>> secretary of state john kerry yesterday on the rising violence in egypt, over 525 people have died in clashes between the military, the police, and supporters of out ofed president muhammad morsi. thousands have been injured since the attacks began yesterday. we are awaiting remarks from president obama this morning from his vacation spot in martha's vineyard. this will be his first live comments on the situation in egypt. we will have the audio only of the president's remarks when they do begin. set to -- actually the president's running a little bit late, we should hear from him in just a moment. we'll have it for you live here on c-span. in the meantime, deputy white house spokesman, josh earnest, had these comments on egypt yesterday during the white house briefing. >> the united states strongly condemns the use of violence against protesters in egypt.
we extend our condolences to the families of those who have been killed and the injured. we have repeatedly called on the egyptian military and security forces to show restraint and for the government to respect the universal rights of its citizens just as we have urged protesters to demonstrate peacefully. the violence will only make it more difficult to move egypt forward on a path to lasting stability and democracy. and runs directly counter to the pledges by interim government to pursue reconciliation. we also strongly oppose a return to a state of emergency law and call on the government to respect basic human rights such as freedom of peaceful assembly and due process under the law. the world is watching what is happening in cairo. we urge the government of egypt and all parties in egypt to refrain from violence and resolve their differences peacefully. so with that opening statement,
we'll go to you for the first question. >> thanks. these are the kinds of statement you have been making for six weeks now, calling for calm. is there anything else the united states can do to apply some leverage here? is the administration reconsidering its position on labeling this a coup? we are still sending $1.3 billion to the military. is there anything we can do to get them to stop the violence? >> as you know over the course of the last several weeks senior officials in the obama administration have been in touch with their counterparts in egypt. we have read out to you a number of calls secretary kerry has done with his counterpart in egypt. we described a number of calls between secretary hagel and his counterparts -- >> deputy spokesman josh ernest. now live to president obama on egypt. >> goes back decades, it's rooted in our respect of egypt a nation, ancient center of
civilization, and cornerstone for peace in the middle east. it's also rooted in our ties to the egyptian people forged through a long-standing partnership. just over two years ago america swass inspired by the egyp -- was inspired by the egyptian's people desire for change. they took to the streets to defend their dignity and demand a government that was responsive to their aspirations for political freedom and economic opportunity. and we said at the time that change would not come quickly or easily, but we did align ourselves with a set of principles. nonviolence, a respect for universal rights, and a process for political and economic reform. in doing so, we were guided by values, but also by interests because we believe nations are more stable and more successful
when they are guided by those principles as well. and that's why we are so concerned by recent events. we appreciate the complexity of the situation. while muhammad morsi was elected president in a democratic election, his government was not inclusive. and did not respect the views of all egyptians. we know that many egyptians, millions of egyptians, perhaps even a majority of egyptians were calling for a change in course. while we do not believe that force is the way to resolve political differences, after the military's intervention several weeks ago, there remained a chance for wreck sellation and an opportunity to pursue a democrat -- reconciliation and an opportunity to pursue a democratic path. instead we have seen a more dangerous path taken through arbitrary arrests. a broad crackdown on mr. morsi's associations and supporters, and
now tragically the violence that's taken the lives of hundreds of people and wounded thousands more. the united states strongly condemns the steps that have been taken by egypt's interim government and security forces. we deplore violence against civilians. we support universal rights essential to human dignity, including the right to peaceful protest. we oppose the pursuit of martial law, which denies those rights to citizens under the principle that security trumps individual freedom. or that might makes right. and today the united states extends its condolences to the families of those who were killed and those who were wounded. given the depths of our partnership with egypt, our national security interests in this pivotal part of the world and our belief that engagement can support a transition back to
a democratically elected civilian government, we have sustained our commitment to egypt and its people. but while we want to sustain our relationship with egypt, our traditional cooperation cannot continue as usual when civilians are being killed in the streets. and rights are being rolled back. as a result, this morning we notified the egyptian government that we are canceling our biannual joint military exercise, which was scheduled for next month. going forward i have asked my national security team to assess the implications of the actions taken by the interim government, and further steps that we may take as necessary with respect to the u.s.-egyptian relationship. let me say that the egyptian people deserve better than what we have seen over the last several days. and to the egyptian people let me say the cycle of violence and escalation needs to stop. we call on the egyptian authorities to respect the
universal rights of the people. we call on those who are protesting to do so peacefully and condemn the attacks that we have seen by protesters, including on churches. we believe that the state of emergency should be lifted, that a process of national reconciliation should begin. that all parties need to have a voice in egypt's future. that the rights of women and relation minorities should be respected, and the commitments must be kept to pursue transparent reforms of the constitution and democratic elections make a parliament and president. in pursuing that path we'll help egypt meet the democratic aspirations of people while attracting the support to help deliver the opportunities to its citizens. violence on the other hand will only feed the cycle polarization that isolates egyptians from one another and from the world and that continues to hamper the
opportunity for egypt to get back on the path of the economic growth. let me make one final point. america cannot determine the future of egypt. that's a task for the egyptian people. it we don't take sides with any particular party or political pig. i know it's -- political figure. i know it's tempting inside egypt to blame the united states or west or some other outside actor for what's gone wrong. we have been blamed by supporters of morsi. we have been blamed by the other side as if we are supporters of morsi. that kind of approach will do nothing to help egyptians achieve the future that they deserve. we want egypt to succeed. we want a peaceful democratic, prosperous egypt. that's our interest. but to achieve that the egyptians are going to have to
do the work. we recognize that change changes time. and that a process like this is never guaranteed. there are examples in recent history of countries that are transitioned out of a military government towards a democratic government, and it did not always go in a straight line and the process was not always smooth. there are going to be false starts. there will be difficult days. america's democratic journey took us through some mighty struggles to perfect our union. from asia to the americas, we know that democratic transitions are measured not in months or even years, but sometimes in generations. so in the spirit of mutual interest and mutual respect, i want to be clear that america wants to be a partner in the egyptian people's pursuit of a better future, and we are guided by our national interest in this long-standing relationship.
but our partnership must also advance the principles that we believe in. and that so many egyptians have sacrificed for these last several years, no matter what party or faction they belong to. so america will work with all those in egypt and around the world who support a future of stability that rests on the foundation of justice and peace and dignity. thank you very much. %%% >> president obama with his first remarks on the rising violence in egypt. the president strongly condemning that violence there and institution of martial law. a number of steps have been taken by the administration. president obama urging the egyptian people to sit down and work out their differences during this political transition. again over 525 people have died in the attacks on egypt. thousands have been injured. we'll keep you update lated --
updated on the situation as it develops. we'll have video of the president's statement on egypt as it's fed to us later this morning. wednesday's violence in egypt began when police moved to clear two sit-in camps in cairo by supporters of former president morsi who was out ofed in a military coup on july 3. the clashes there later spread out in cairo and a string of other cities. yesterday government officials declared a nationwide state of emergency due to the violence. yesterday the atlantic council held a round table discussing addressing press freedom in egypt during the country's political transition period. speakers include sherif mansour of the committee to protect journalists. >> sherif has previously worked
in washington and managed advocacy training. in 2010 he co-founded the quite famous egyptian asocialation for change, which is the washington based nonprofit mobilizing egyptians in the u.s. to support he opposition coalition led by hamid. sherif has been involved in monitoring the elections for the center in cairo and worked as a freelance journalist. in 2004 he was honored by the center for human rights for his work in defenged freedom and expression in egypt. on my right is adel iskander, whose research focuses on media and communication. adel is the author, co-author of several works including the story of the network that's rattling government and redefining modern journalism. and mediating the upridings. is most recent fubblescation
is, egypt in flux. you probably should have waited to finish that book. adel teaches at the certainty for contemporary arab studies in communication, cultural, and technology program in georgetown university in washington, d.c. we are going to ask him to start. sherif, today this meeting's being held today because the c.p.j. is launching its report on press freedom in egypt. the report is called, on the divide, press freedom at risk in egypt. there are copies available. please pick one up on your way out. i'm going to let sherif talk about the report. >> thank you very much. thank you for the atlantic council for holding the event. and for us to come along. adel is one of the people who also helped us in writing the report. a hero to c.p.j. about the media environment in egypt. this report is short compilation
of all our work on monitoring the egyptian press, violations since morsi took over in june, 2012. we have had more than 40 different releases and commentary about press violations, about press issues in egypt, and we conducted an assessment mission led by our xecutive director to cairo where we met with more than 15 people from across the spectrum, n.g.o.'s, government and opposition, to assess their perception of press freedom under president morsi. since then we have been planning to issue the report and original date was june 30. and you know what happened then. so we decided to wait a little bit and see if there is anything to add about the -- that
resulted in a whole chapter. you'll find it in the second chapter we call military censorship. in that chapter and in morsi chapter we tried as much as possible to assess different things. one is the legal environment. and this is our biggest finding is that yes, egypt had revolution. several interim governments. and each of them have promised to it include and introduce reforms into the system, including press environment. for so long the journalists in egypt have advocated for abolishing a lot of the restrictions on journalists and the press, and every government that came to power since mubarak said they will respond to that. they didn't. the muslim brotherhood, particularly under morsi, had a complete opportunity to change
the system. they ran a process to draft a new constitution, and they even at the end they manipulated the process. they could introduce anything they wanted to do. but on the contrary they didn't just keep a lot of those press restrictions introduced others. and constitution that was approved at the end of 2012. have our local partners, counted as many as 70-something articles in egyptian penal code, including the press law, that restricts freedom of the press and freedom of speech. in addition to that, the legal aspects, operational aspect and how the government is handling critical voices, all the governments since mubarak was out ofed -- ousted have also fallen short in respect to
critical views. under morsi there was a whole ampaign against the media, intimidation, physical and legal intimidation for journalists, that included hundreds of cases profile against political journalists. accusing them of defamation charges. one of our local partner, egyptian organization for human rights, has counted 600 of those cases after nine-month only of president morsi's tenure. so that's like several times more the number of case that is were filed during mubarak 50 years. the comparison is just huge how much this specific tactic, which we considered in the past a hallmark of the mubarak regime, morsi has won that title fair and square. later on also morsi supporters have waged physical attacks
against journalistings. we have counted in the -- journalists. we counted in the first of morsi's tenure, 78 physical attacks in preventing journalists from covering opposition protest. those also have been around the media production city, which in several cases, the muslim brotherhood and their allies, wanted to limit, intimidate media coverage of the opposition by organizing sitins which sieged the media city which is a hub for almost all tv stations in egypt, including independent and private ones. so that happened three times during the year. it only happened when morsi wanted to push in controversial
policies, one of them was against the army. one was a constitution making itself. and one was trying to crack down on media. so all in all president morsi have kept a lot of the restrictions, renewed and used more of those restrictions and introduced new one. the government over the last months have waged censorship. at the ed immediately speech that general cici gave to morsi. there were two concerning signs. one is several minutes after told police vehicles took them to the media city and physically stopped coverage of at least five stations that support president morsi, former
president morsi. and they arrested 200 people, and later on kept 21 of them under investigations of so-called conspiring to it overthrow the regime. that's a time the regime itself had only a few minutes to start. one of the people i talked to did not even have a chance to speak one word before he was arrested. these tv stations so far still closed. some of those stations are kept behind bars for accusation of inciting violence. so we have two things here. one of them is -- there is an executive body, making executive administrative decision resulting in judicial overview or independent assessment of the content of those stations, and that violates international standards and we try in the report to introduce some of those norms.
hanthere is a resident, jew necessaryburg convention, that took place -- johannesburg convention, that took place, where you can see the most dialect between violence. the participant in this conference including people from the press, freedom organization, journalists, and also people who represent the government opinion of maintaining order and also preventing crime. and the way they have handled this is they reach a balance in which they can -- respect the individual rights of speech and also the government mandate of using sanctions to prevent crime. and they have said that maybe we need very clear and specific law that designs what the violence is and also directly lnk it to
changes or events on the ground. and also have independent verification from a court that follows that law and interprets that law. so it shouldn't be a judicial -- shouldn't be an executive decision. so this is one of the key issues a sign monitor ahead as whether this interim government, led by the military, is expecting through freedom of spee. they met several promises, to respect freedom of speech and the press, one of them was delivered on, which was abolishing or reducing the sentence of charges on insulting the president, limiting it only to reasonable fines up to $5,000 , but there are other, of course, important recommendations and promises that need to be implemented, including abolishing all
criminal charges on press relations. specifically jail sentences. we also introduce some recommendation at the end of the report for political parties, international community mainly to save guard and protect the press by amendments in the constitution, which is an ongoing process right now that could conclude in a few months, independent ng judiciary so they can act as an arbitrator in safeguarding the press freedom. and also for political parties to help and secure and protect journalists because they have a responsibility as well in addition to the government. fascinating the work. and the international community to keep press freedom on their agenda because it is a key sign to interpret the interim
government behavior and the responses and democratic transition. this is all in all very important, but also opened for questions later. thank you again. >> thank you. it you actually finished way before time. adel, can we ask you. >> sure. first and foremost thank you very much for the invitation both to the atlantic council and for c.p.j. for having me here. my thoughts and reflexes i think are going to try and not reiterate what sherif had explained, but rather take it in a direction of probably the state of journalism in egypt. and how sort of the legal, structural problems and institutional problems we have described thus far in terms of the various authorities that have been in place in the past two years have had as far as an impact when it comes to journalistic practice.
now, if i were to assess the situation as far as journalism is concerned, the last two years that are characteristic -- are characteristically a time when reporting in egypt has both flourished and faltered. sometimes in tandem. we have seen the tail end or the very last period of the mubarak era, there was a significant uptick in sort of openness of the media, journalists were starting to feel far more sort of liberated, if you will, or prepared to take greater risks and be as courageous as they could be within certain parameters. as far as their news organizations deemed it permissible. of course that culminated during the 18 days of the uprising, and then in the immediate aftermath, it appeared as though the only sort of pandora's box, black box was the military.
for over 60 years the military had a fairly strong grasp as far as the media is concerned, very little information about the but ry's political role, more importantly their economic assets in the country, had ever made its way into the newspapers or in public discussion or public debate. nevertheless, it didn't take long before that pandora's box opened up. le it thee 18 months of interim period, during consecutive periods of political jockeying between various groups, notably the muslim brotherhood in alliance with scaf and the various revolutionary groups that felt ostracized or marginalized by the progress in the political scene, that led to slashes in the streets and the clashes in the streets sort of provided
munition for many of those news organizations to begin to venture into that space. and begin to critique the military in a manner that they hadn't done previously. we saw the military retaliate in some respects. but to a large extent it was important and critical for scaf during that period to illustrate their commitment to an open and free media environment in egypt. so it was around that time that they effectively ratified our license, 16 new satellite station, some of which happened to be islamist networks, others are private networks that are now -- that now espouse a very sport of fervent anti-brotherhood position. so basically they opened up the spectrum significantly, while at the same time reinstating or sort of bringing back the ministry of information after having promised to dissolve it entirely. so it was basically a mixed bag
during that period. nevertheless from a journalistic standpoint at the time when morsi was elected to assume the presidency, i think that was probably the widest margin of openness for journalism in egypt. shortly thereafter, morsi found himself at odds politically with various groups, and that of course translated into animosity from various news organizations that ascribe to a particular sort of ideological stance or had interests that were not served by the muslim brotherhood. more importantly as sherif described, what culminated was not a particularly open environment for the media. it was immediate retraction of the various gains that the media had accomplished during that period. and probably the most important was -- or the most critical and problematic of those
curtailments was the rise of almost a populist movement that could be utilized and mobilized at will to target news organizations, to besiege the media production city, and things of that sort. so it is no longer the apparatus of the state that was the soul instrument for the suppression of the media but rather that it was something a little bit more complicated an that -- than that. the egyptian public, egyptian people, sort of a necessary tool, if you will, or has become sort of a figure of speech where the egyptians stand, we the egyptian people support morsi. we the egyptian people elected him. or we the egyptian people came out en masse to oppose him. as a figure of speech it was used to critique the media. and arguably during that period there was a struggle to really
maintain some degree of professionalism within the egyptian media scene. towards the end i would say probably shortly after the struggle over the constitution in november and december of 2012, that's when things really -- the polarization became so entrenched it became practically intractable. that media organizations picked a side, picked a camp, and pushed for it through and through in a manner that, of course, sort of -- was bewildering for audience that is weren't necessarily polarized. but more importantly may have seemed extremely problematic from the standpoint of international journalists who are reporting on egypt at the time. basically you could not get two sides of the same story on the same network. so muslim brotherhood politicians and officials and islamists in general would be
berated almost 24 hours a day on some of the private networks. and on the islamist channels that the opposition could do no good in any conceivable way and they were criminalized and incrimet -- incitement against them. so whatever had been accomplished or gained journalistically speaking in terms of defining the characteristics and the ethics and the morality, whatever moral grounding journalism as a profession happens to have in egypt was quickly wilting. nevertheless for those who believe that there is something to be said about the value of having a partisan press, so long as it's diverse and covers sort of a wide variety of different views, some rejoice in these possibilities. that there was -- the egyptian equivalent of fox news and msnbc and various other stations. this polarization took on a far
more ominous outlook. immediately after the removal of morsi. of course the examples that sherif had described where curtailment became, again, once again, the dominion of the state. the states stepped in and said this is problematic programming. this is in opposition to the new political circumstance, and it cannot continue to exist. so stations were taken off air. journalists were detained. and then we are unfortunately facing a circumstance now where we have gone a complin case of different factors that are currently under way. the polarization remains steadfast. perhaps more so than ever before. almost to the extent that when you're watching egyptian television programming, you switch between channels and it can create a sense of schizophrenia, because on one side you hear a narrative through and through. on the other side you see the
complete counter point, complete polar opposite. but the two conditions are, one, sort of a heavy-handed attempt to censor information that would be deemed problematic to the transitional governance process. and then more importantly or more subtly i should say is process of self-censorship. self-censorship is not necessarily the one we have grown accustomed to whereby journalists out of fear of what repercussions, legal repercussions they may face and the liability of expressing oppositional views, it's something a little bit more complicated than that. it's almost as if by committing themeselves to a specific political camp, if they were to contradict the messaging of that camp, that they would risk the thinkuityso the self-censorshii is largely an opportunistic
self-censorship, imposed by journalists for journalists to create sort of a media climate, and a psychic milieu within the country. that comes to the head with the events of last night and today, which i think for those of you who are following egypt closely, you will be well aware of the fact that two journalists have been killed, one of whom works for skye news, and another that works, a cameraman for skye, and a reporter for gulf news, a uae-based newspaper. the circumstances behind their killings are not clear. nevertheless, it at least lives up the performance of the morsi era, where there was at least two killings -- am i correct?
during that period. and they arrested numerous journalists. in a couple of months, the egyptian media environment has suffered significant setbacks. whilewould argue that, the setbacks that are immediately identifiable, of course the loss of life as much as we tend to mourn and focus on this, i think the greatest and gravest fallback has largely been a loss of any commitment to the journalistic practice as an important condition for the transition towards democratic governance. so, today we are at that point where media content precipitates a collision course, a political collision course between various parties. all of this to say that, really, most programming on
egyptian media is comprised of opinion with spring things of news. that's a -- sprinklings of news. nevertheless, i think it is a product of 60 years of false messaging. course,absence, of historically, journalists are the most reputable and veteran journalist in egypt were often opinion writers, the equivalent of syndicated columnist. even if you use the word -- [arabic] until probably the beginning of 2000, it would imply that one of the notable writers who had stopped reporting back when they were in their early 20's. at the end of the day, egyptian media was anchored on
opinionated content. today, we are back to this opinionated content. arguably, the significant difference is that the impositions are no longer from the hierarchical tiers at the top. that applies to the state media. i cannot imagine the state broadcasting has reached a level of liberty from its own structural entrenchment that you could criticize the military on channel one or now tv openly. we have not seen it happen. in fact, there were a couple of circumstances where journalists were taken off air or there seem to be some sort of suspicious interruption of programming when something that was deemed critical to the military was being aired. so there is that component. but i think that is far less substantial than what i described earlier. i cannot find the proper word
for it. maybesomeone else has, there is a term. we are in the presence of lawrence, who has taught journalism in egypt. perhaps during the question and answer period, we can pick your brain as to whether or not there is an appropriate word to describe self censorship that is not necessarily out of fear of authority. that is probably one of the most problematic aspects moving forward. at the end of the day, one characteristic that we needwe af lawrence, who has taught to sort of recognize as probably a major detriment to journalistic practice moving forward is the -- sort of a crescendo of jingoistic nationalism in egypt today. and it is being drummed up arguably by both sides. just to serve their purposes.
even though there appeared to be two different visions and two different perspectives that do not communicate across to one another, this entrenchment translates not just in the broadcast media, but also in the social media. social media world, unfortunately because they are defined by our self selecting processes, have become two separate encampments that do not communicate to each other all. and because typically news organizations and media utilize social media to amplify their messaging, they end up either helping precipitate that even more or benefiting from it. various groups do not speak to each other or across from each other anymore. so there are two parallel realities. when you hear stories from egypt today, it's either the muslim brotherhood, or a violent terrorist organization that are being dispersed by professional police and security force.
or that the police came outand s organizations and media utilize social media to amplify their messaging, they end up either helping precipitate that and andsed live ammunition slaughtered hundreds if not thousands, depending on who you listen to, of people. and so, this is unfortunately where we are. thank you for giving me an opportunity to speak. >> thank you. on that gloriously cheerful note, we are going to open the floor to questions. if you ask a question, perhaps the best thing to do is maybe to take two questions at a time. actually, we do not have that many people. can you just identify yourself so that we know who you are? hello. >> hannah. i work for the cluster newspaper -- macluster newspapers. momentber there was a when after january 25 they were trying to purge state media of the stenographers and really, ad
there was this schizophrenic moment where there was an editorial line on the front page that did not match page three, because of the slow pace of this. that wondering how far process got along before what we are seeing now. and also, what is the state of the journalism syndicate right now? themuld you like both of to take this? >> sure. theell, as we mentioned in report and also he alluded to, there were about four months after mubarak was ousted where there was no information minister. so you can see that this was a very unique time. also, in this unique time, a little bit after, there was a lot of movement, allowing more
voices to appear. so, for example, one of the things we talk about in the report, a lot of morsi's supporters have said that he is responsible for allowing a lot of those -- to exist. when he came into power, by the time he came into power, there were a lot more voices than there are now. many of those voices made by businessman who felt that there is an opportunity and there is needs for people to hear more news, that people were excited about politics for the first time. they were debating everything that happened. so we've seen a mushrooming of new tv stations, diverse opinions. it was not until morsi came to power, that those tv stations were shrunk in terms of numbers
and coverage. and they started to become entrenched in to two men camps. before them, you have seen -- there were people closer to the military, who were in the military, the muslim brotherhood have their own channel. they are not fully aligned. you can see a lot of spectrum happening. in terms of the syndicate of journalists, we are in touch with them and two of them have signed on to our recommendations. they are in agreement with our findings and our positions. and they have taken on a considerable role after ousting morsi. in the discussion was reform and the legal system.
they have managed to convince the interim government to restructure the high council and basically nominate people to be in the new counsel who will take on some press issues, including code of conduct, and managing the process, the press, media, in the interim period. so they are taking on fully by law now the mandate that used to belong to the council under morsi, which is a big role to play. they have nominated at least three of nine or ten members who are running the council right now. >> organizationally, did they endorse -- >> not organizationally. thaturrent leadership of syndicate, know -- not an ally
of morsi. there is a definite person that used to be the head of the syndicate for morsi, and he lost. last summer. yes, he has been not on a friendly basis, morsi, and as an ally to the government, but we have seen him defend a lot of the muslim brotherhood media and speak on their behalf. for example, he interfered to help publish the muslim brotherhood's freedom and justice party newspaper. he also spoke out on the killing of one of the muslim brotherhood journalists in front of the presidential guard. he is now speaking on al- jazeera journalist who is in custody now on the charge of
weapons possession. >> i think he covered most of the territory. if you follow the trajectory of the syndicate, which you did until various -- in various periods, until the last period of the mubarak era, it has been at odds with most governments. during the mubarak period and during morsi's time, at least it became more pronounced after the election of -- el -- now i think it's more cautious with regards to dealings with the military, but at the same time it is trying to strike a balance. i think the journalist syndicate is a really good barometer as far as the health of the egyptian journalistic
enterprise that any given moment. i think right now it's an interesting time. towards the late end of the morsi period, the syndicate had become almost fully activist against the government. now a little bit more cautious. the other point i would make with regards to the state media and reforms, especially newspapers and who writes what on the third page, to a large extent what ended up happening is that, again it depends who you speak to, because the governmentof mohammed morsi in the muslim brotherhood will accuse the state media of failing to be reined or refused to become an enterprise of state politics or refuses to be a platform for government. most of these accusations are
directed towards specific personalities, writers, editors on the grounds they are loyal to the former mubarak regime. upon the assent of the muslim brotherhood that age old hostilities remained. so they refuse to acknowledge that this may be part and parcel of the reform of the organization to serve as a watchdog role, which would be a transformative experience for any state broadcaster or state publication. on the contrary, critics of the muslim brotherhood would say that it is during that period some of the state media did a better job that they had, at least better than the time under mubarak. and almost certainly better than the performance today. so i think there was a window of opportunity for state media to get shuffled up. and i think the shuffling did happen.
the question is, who is identifying it is a good thing and for what purpose? so that is sort of where we are. when you have cataclysmic moments like the one we're are going to today, it becomes much easier to either contain or tame or bring state media into the fold to avoid inflaming the situation. now we've got a state of emergency for the month and curfews. at moments of heightened over securitization there is a tendency for whatever gains made within the state media to be retracted or to be camouflaged. >> next question? nancy? i'm sorry. >> so [inaudible]
now you said you're watching two different camps. ideological polarization? [inaudible] and the lack of nonpartisan states for independent, objective media that can sustain themselves -- puts cash on the table for them. [inaudible] where can these groups -- find resources for these groups in order to sustain themselves? so they generate their own -- when something like that happens -- independence which was an excellent media in egypt, but they just had to close it down.
>> the answer is more freedom and less involvement by the government and more innovative ways to fund and allow ngo's, civil society to own shares of tv's and media institutions. so far, the process has not changed at all to be able to open a channel or to be able to operate a newspaper. there is less polarization in the process, but it has to be reconsidered. a lot of the people in civil society would like to have their voices continue to have ability to reach out either by tv stations, radio and so on, without interference from the government.
it is also the fact that journalism itself has a responsibility here to speak in one voice and unite -- either -- against either or any of the media professional journalists. we see that as a role, is the journalist syndicate can play, as a civil society organization away from government interference over -- and sifting out what our journalistic standards are and of ethics" would entail. we need to revisit the law, allowing more voices to appear without asking for more fees to be put in by organizations or tv station, which allows more people to take shares and ownership and reduce the monopoly of parties or businessmen on the content of the media.
>> i would add three points. the first is an extremely utopian and impractical idea which is effectively the restructuring of state media to become something akin to a public broadcaster. and really privatizing most of the newspapers and magazines, of which there are too many to be read. thes a huge drain on national budget. but nevertheless, state broadcasting, if i understand correctly, employs 40,000 people. so something needs to give in that respect. so there is that age-old dilemma that is not going to solve itself immediately. and then the second point is, with regards to small, independent media enterprises, very lean, sort off the cuff, spontaneous, extemporaneous
and, creative citizen-style journalism which is spreading in egypt and has become a source of her lines for almost all broadcasters nowadays. the amount of footage that comes out at the drop of a hat, something happens, you have hundreds of videos being circulated. i think that is becoming a critical part of the verification and cooperation and accuracy, dimension of news programming which is missing across the board. if you can verify, that it becomes newsworthy. the third, this is one of the few positive signs from what i have seen in some polls, that one of the top television news organizations -- it is probably -- of course, it has its own
polemical anchors and talk show hosts, but by and large, as far as newscasts go, it is probably the most middle-of-the-road of all the private news organizations. since their ratings are extremely high, even though they do not cater to the polarities. they do not have any of the young pundits -- yelling pundits, they are still able to steer clear of all of this cacophony and maintain very high ratings compared to everyone else. programll leave this here. we are going to go now to the republican national committee summer meeting. rents previous, we see on the screen will unveil the rising stars program. they will highlight some of the new voices in the republican party.
elected, some perhaps firefighters, municipal employees, or people involved in charities that are conservatives and republicans that are making a difference in the community. today is one of those days. i'm going to introduce everyone up here in the panel. i will conduct like yesterday, ask each of them a couple of questions, and then we will open it up to all of you to ask questions as well. first, to my left, we have marlinda garcia who was elected to the house of representatives at age 23. she is in her fourth term, on the finance committee and as a record of leading and women's health and job growth. she is also a leader in the latino community and has been featured on fox news latino.
she has received the innovative health care pioneer award and was recognized as one of the 45 most influential women under 45 by the republican security council. i want to thank her. we also saw each other as well in new york. thank you for coming. to my right, was the founder and president of the network of the enlightened women, the nation's premier organization for conservative university women. she is a graduate of the university of virginia for her undergrad and a law degree. not an easy law school to get into. she practices law in d.c. and is a senior fellow at the independent women's forum. she has been named as one of the maverick pc 40 under 40 and was
one of the 30 under 30. thank you, karen, for being here. scott erickson, to my left, came all the way from california, where we just were a few months ago. he spent 15 years serving as a police officer in san jose working on the recognition and identification of terrorist organizations. he holds a masters of science degree in criminal justice studies from the university of cincinnati, and if that were not enough, scott has collaborated extensively with the heritage foundation, frequently contributing to their blog. scott is focused on issues of national security, includingidet organizations. he holds foreign terrorist organizations, law enforcement, and missile defense. he has co-authored several reports at heritage, including his latest, lessons from benghazi.
and to my right, the speaker of the oklahoma state house, t.w. shannon. he is the first african-american to hold that position. i had the privilege of meeting him in my last trip to oklahoma. he has been on the road with me, helping the rnc raise money as well. t.w.is a big plus for he is a registered member of the chickasaw make -- nation. voiceaker, he has been a for limited government, personal responsibility, has advocated saving taxpayer money, and building oklahoma's infrastructure. speaker shannon has been nationald to the gopac advisory board. i will let him tell you the himself, but i think
many of you will want one after this. i will ask a few questions, but first, let's go around the room, started to my left -- in five minutes, tell us what brought you here, why you are republican, and what you hope to accomplish now. >> thank you for having me here today. i came from a great bastion of conservatism known as san francisco. born and raised in the bay area. rule of in a very politically- oriented household. not necessarily one that we had family members involved in politics, but we discussed the issues of the day. growing up, as much as i resisted and wanted to talk about sports, the conversation always came back to current events. grow upped me, i think, and be somebody who could is concerned with the nation. my father is a police officer.
when i turned 18 years old, i decided that was what i wanted to do. i became a reserve officer with the city of san jose when i turned 21, did that for a few years, and then transitioned into a full-time job. i have been working the streets on san jose for the past 11 years. as far as activism goes, i had developed a lot of close relationship with friends of the heritage foundation. a few years ago, an opportunity came to me to discuss the issues important to me, through the heritage foundation. over the past couple of years, i have been writing extensively for heritage, for their blog, and that opened up a lot of opportunities for me as well to write for a vote -- other publications. because thelican republican party exemplifies most closely the belief and
values and principles i hold. i think we should be promoting -- like each and everyone of you, i am here, because as an individual there is only so much i can do, but as a gerberry is no limit what we can do. it is important to get together with like minds, and others who are not, and include them in the conversation to develop a plan forward so that we can be successful in 2014 and beyond. >> thank you. >> thank you all for having me. it is a pleasure to be here. especially in boston. i was born in boston and my family then moved to new hampshire for greener pastures, you could say, when i was 8. then i subsequently came back here for college and higher ed, and then went back to new hampshire. similar to what scott was saying, my family was not necessarily politically active
and nobody to my knowledge has been in any elected office, but i do remember on occasion i would get up there and hold signed with my mother, can best for a candidate about something that was sparked in a discussion about an issue that was pressing, or something that concerned us as a family. found,went to college, i it is a time where everything you think you believe, you are forced to get down to the fundamentals of what it is and why it is what it is what you believe in. i was involved with the college republicans when i decided to register to vote when i was 18. they were in the party that i closely identified with in terms of my vision for the country, all of the ideals of personal responsibility and individual freedom and all of that.
in college, of course, i had to defend that a lot. as a young female of hispanic and italian descent, in higher under then fell stairs type of, you are a republican? that is weird. which i think is offensive, that people would assume such a thing based on how i look. it was great because it forced me to come to terms and understand why it is i believe what i believe, and why i identified as a republican. beyond that, when i graduated, i was 23. the midterm elections in 2006 were rolling around. honestly, i thought i would help on the campaign. i called a friend involved in politics in the state and said who could i sign up with? it was at that time, for the first time ever, someone suggested, why don't you run
yourself for state representative? the thought had never crossed my mind, something that i never thought would be a possibility for me, anything i had considered. at the end of the day, i realized the rudiments of campaigning, all of that, are pretty basic. i had held on other people's campaign, so i figured i knew what to do, so i knocked on a lot of doors, came up with my platform, and i ended up winning. fast forward to today. it has been a great experience. i have loved being involved, working to help my state, and now helping to promote the conservative ideals on the national level. i think this is a great program because it is really important that people here from those of us that are actually connecting all the time with communities, with citizens, are out there making decisions on issues that
affect people's lives. this is good. thank you for inviting me. >> thank you. t.w.? >> thank you for inviting me. i am here because i am concerned that the liberal party has been defining me as a minority, our party. quite frankly, they get the definition wrong on every front. the chairman was talking about how we would continue to make people understand, the republican party is open for everyone. we do not have to change what we believe as a party. we have an opportunity to tell our story, that we are the party of limited government, the party of personal responsibility. like i said before, i did not receive those values from the members of congress are work for, i did not get them when i went to college, i got them in a predominately african-american church in oklahoma.
those are part of the valleys of who i am as a person. the republican party, i believe, is the last great hope, for this nation and for the world. if we fail, i am concerned about what this place would look like for my children. growing up in oklahoma, in a small town, about 100,000 people, i have got the chance to experience all types of diversity. what i figured out is most people want exactly the same thing. they want better opportunities for their children and grandchildren. that is what this party has been about from day one. we have to go out and sell that message. as i look over the horizon, i am encouraged by the other young people that i see. the liberal media would have to believe that there is nobody that looks like the people on stage that has an r by their name.
when i was resent -- represented as speaker of the house, they did not do it because of what i looked like. i promised to make them chairman of the committee as well. that was a joke. [laughter] we have an opportunity in oklahoma to be an example for the rest of the nation. there is one thing we can all agree on. we cannot continue to allow the federal government to leave, whether it is health care, economic development, infrastructure. is government has proven it either incapable or unwilling to make the changes that will move the country forward. forward willement happen in the 50 capitals in state government. i am happy to lend my voice to what i think is america's last great hope. >> i will tell you something else about t.w. shannon, we spent some time on the road,
obviously very articulate, but he is also pretty tough on an airplane with turbulence. i fly just about every other but so i can take a lot, there are some times when the plane is going crazy. he is one of these guys who is just turning the page on the newspaper when things are going nuts. okay, karen? >> a pleasure to be here. my involvement with women in politics stems from and internships i had in washington, d.c. for one of my home state senators, senator lugar from indiana. that was my first time being around a lot of conservative women who were smart, ambitious, and wanted to have families and careers, and we were trying to figure that all out. feminist voices were not reaching a lot of them, were not reaching me as a young woman. so when i went back to the university of virginia for my third year of undergrad, i sought out an environment what i
found in d.c., smart and ambitious woman who wanted to talk about the issues of the day and did not want to just throw out one-liners. we were interested in how a 500- page bill would affect them and their lives. i went to some of our wint -- women's organizations at you v.a., and as you can imagine, they were not so open to conservative women. on the way home from class one day, i walk by a building called the women's center. i thought at the time, this could beat it, a great outlet to talk about these issues. i called and scheduled a meeting with faculty member there. she was excited to have a bright-eyed student who wanted to learn more. but all the programs were really coming from a radical feminist perspective and more on the left. with this faculty member, i thought this is my shot to ask if they would be interested in working together. so i asked the university of virginia faculty member, the
women's center, if they would be interested in co sponsoring an event for young women. she looked at me like i was crazy, chuckled, and said, not here. that is when i decided to start an alternative. the network of enlightened women, an organization for conservative women on college campuses. spread to over 20 college campuses nationally with a big national conference each summer in washington, d.c. and we are really growing. i think these principles can resonate with young women. i am excited to be here and to continue to work to reach young women with conservative ideas. >> thank you. t.w. shannon, can you give us an idea, example or two of the republican present -- principles, conservative principles that you have been able to show the people of
oklahoma that really do create jobs and opportunity? the proof is in the pudding. if you look at trends across the nation, states run by republican governors and legislatures have fare far better than those that are not. the reason it is because of the policy we implement. have tooma, we majorities in both chambers feared we have a great republican governor, mary fallon, who is doing a great job leading the state. we were able to reduce taxes in this environment. many people would tell you that that could not be done, that the sky would fall. we voted to reduce taxes this year. tax cut coming up, the state income tax. about 5.25 now. we will take it down another 0.15%. we are north of the 13th largest economy in the world in texas,
so you have to remain competitive. if you want people to invest more, if you allow people to keep more of their money, we know as conservatives, they will either suspended or save it and invest, which is good for the county. we overhauled our worker compensation system. we have some of the highest rates in the nation as well as in the region. we revamped our system, moving from an antiquated system, moving to a new system that will essentially safe employers, people who create jobs, 50% to 20% on their premiums every year. their premiumsn every year. people always say, stop talking about social problems. i think that is nonsense. you take every social issue known to man, whether it is high incarceration rates, drug and
substance abuse issues -- i think they can all be traced to one key ingredient, and that is the breakdown of the family unit. this year in oklahoma we said we would do things to promote the family, going on a campaign to express why strong families are not as good for society, they are good for the economy, and great for the state. those are just a few examples of how we are proving conservative values are what will lead to prosperity. [applause] conservatives, we lend to the conservatives -- the liberals ideas about social justice. frankly, there is only one system that has done more for man to get people out of generational poverty, and that is capitalism. we should be promoting that and telling that story more and telling into every community. the democrats love this war on women thema.
while mitt romney -- as you know, there was a struggle with single women. at the same time you have democrats like eliot spitzer, ner --y weiner, fil >> quite the group. >> what are some of the things that you think we can do better women?h young obviously, there are many opportunities, but what would your advice be in getting better at that, maybe reaching more people, young women, for example, across the board? see in thatited to report, a big section on w reaching women. women are not some unified voting bloc that will vote liberal everytime, because it is more complicated than that. as to reaching young women, in
the last election, the democrats were really successful in putting out a number of images and celebrity ads to target young women. i think one of the things that we need to be doing is recognizing the difference segments of women and targeting them. i have to admit, as a young woman, i found some of the things the left putting out as frankly insulting. remember the life of julia? the image of a woman showing her life from age 3 to 67 under obama? it was basically every major decision, there was something she had to do with the federal government. i found that insulting. we need to put out an alternative to that and that will speak to women. the keys are targeting these different segments, recognizing it is a different block. and then meeting women where there are. for young women, a lot of what we're doing in news, we use the technology that college women are using, speak to them through
their professors and other students, and peers, and try to meet the more they are. >> on a similar front, marilinda garcia, what do you think could be done, what would be your advice to get more young women to run for office? >> i think programs like this are important because they showcase people liked karin do wonderful work, other elected officials around the country around my age. it seems to me -- the most important thing for me, was that somebody actively encourages someone to take that step. studies doneen about corporate involvement with women, all these other sectors, and what they always say is with women, despite all the things being equal -- they are
qualified, intelligent, capable, accomplished just as much as their male counterparts, we tend qualifications, the timing, all of these things, and not run for that promotion, not ask for the salary raise. intersection is an with politics there, in terms of putting yourself out there, trying to be a leader and all of these things. i think, with women, the issue examplesurse, having out there. we have some fantastic ones. we both have great female governors, all sorts of wonderful elected women. in my state alone, we have the first majority female state senate. we have two female senators on the federal level. out thereneed to be encouraging. when i speak to groups of young
women, college students, high school students, whatever it may be, i always just say it is great to help, great to be involved, but seriously consider doing it yourself as well. know that you are capable, and that there is a support structure there for you. there are actually a lot of crude groups out there now that i talk to -- good groups out there now that i talk to that i did not know about when i first ran. are there now and i am happy to help. >> scott, you have written extensively about benghazi, snowden. what do you wish people understood about barack obama and his foreign policy record that you're concerned people do not? >> people are starting to understand is a bit more broadly, but the american people need to understand, in this administration we have seen a systematic decline in our stature and position in the
world and the respect that other nations, either allies or adversaries have for us, has declined to that is the primary thing i want people to understand. the best we can ameliorate that is, of course, to elect a republican to the white house in 2016. that could have a dramatic effect. [applause] as ank that could have dramatic affect on our stature the electionas did of ronald reagan. we saw a complete flip with respect to how people view the us. repercussions to their actions. we do not have that today. the president has a penchant for dithering and provocation here that will not change over the next two years. he could do a few things with respect to this note in case. tocould take the opportunity reacquaint himself with the
agreements that the bush administration had with the czech republic, poland, the place of missile defense assets in europe, something that he were rejected in his administration. those are the things that would tell the russian government, vladimir putin, that we are serious, we are not just about rhetorical posturing. we will actually take action. back to you on hispanic engagement. what advice would you have to our party to do a better job? this question because i come from new hampshire and we have about a 2% hispanic population. it's funny when i get the immigration question, i usually start by saying, well, in canada is not really a problem -- anyway, it is a different experience than it is in texas, out west. but it is a very important issue.
the problem, which feeds off of what t.w. mentioned, unfortunately, when there is a loud voice saying something sensational or offensive, that is what is plastered all over the news. that ends up being our position, which is ludicrous, of course. we just have to accept that is the way it is going to be. so what we have to be doing -- again, this comes down to state and local officials, people in the community, neighborhood. you have to connect with people, as a person. you have to talk to them, talk to them at the grocery store. get them involved with parents' associations at school. and then guide the conversation. ask them questions, are you happy with the education system, are you happy with property taxes, are you worried about such and such?
then you can tell them, well, this is what i believe, this is the way i think about this issue. these are the solutions that such and such an elected official or candidate for office supports. do you agree? when it comes from a personal level, when it comes from an issue-based focus, then you can have a meaningful impact. it is a lot harder during election season when you're trying to get out there and capture a group. of course, it is important to spanish media, to use all of these social media things, but a longe to be sincere, term, engaged effort. i hope we are out there in those communities. make the are going to sale, you have to show up and ask for the order. it is harder before an election. >> exactly.
it is interesting that republicans and democrats, immigrants, race, all of these things -- elections are cyclical. it is interesting to see how the parties involved, perceptions of who is on what side. you have to think long term. everything is not always going to be this way. the dialogue will change, the situation will change. someone to talk to, someone out there connecting with them, that is when you can make a meaningful impact. >> t.w., i promised i would ask you about the truth, so could you tell us about it? article, as an profile on me. in my office i have this sofa that i call the true sofa. so often members will come in and tell me what they think. i meet with constituents on a regular basis. when you're in there, you get
one on one, and you get the real story line is for the policy, why they do not. that is what we have to do as a party, engage people one-on-one. i think about my own district. when you talk about minority outreach, different demographic out rich, my district is 54% democrat, 34% republican, 12% independent. but about 25% of that is african-american. i carry the african-american vote each time i ran, and i did that by going one-on-one. fromthe third generation where i'm from fear they are not voting for some unknown republican. that made a big difference. that is what we have to do as a party, make sure that we are going out and talking to people one on one, let the chairman laid out in his plan, and not showing up the day or month
before an election, but having a presence in the community for the long term. this is a relationship. i will give you a great example. everyone remembers the chik-fil- a issue. if you have a facebook account, you would have thought there was nobody in support of chik-fil-a. the liberals and democrats have done such a good job of reinforcing what they already believe about that issue. when it came time to show up to there was ak-fil-a, different response. that is my point here this is a relationship business. >> thank you. did you want to tackle the issue of bias at universities? what advice would you give to folks out here as to what they can do to tackle this issue at
our universities and colleges across the country. there inis someone out the crown that does that, so it is great to see. tackling the universities. that is a challenge. one thing that we have to do is first to acknowledge there are problems there, and secondly, create alternative environments. one of the things that we have done is created an alternative home for conservative women. we get them educated through issues through a book club, and then there are emboldened to speak up in their class is, get engaged. it is important to really provide and foster those alternatives. localof you who run republican organizations and clubs, reach out to the college republicans at your universities and invite them to your meetings, get engaged with them and see what you can do on that front. that is important. then, i am happy to say, from indiana, we have our former
governor mitch daniels who is now the head of purdue university. [applause] hem excited to see what would do to see if he can turn that around into a market leader for ideas, a market leader for changing some things at universities across the country. >> speaking of indiana, is tim here? why don't you tell the group when governor pence did today. yesterday was my first official day as state chairman. i serve for role -- the last 14 years in state elected office, first of state treasurer, and then auditor. today, governor pence named duane sawyer, an african- presidentown council
from indiana as my replacement as the new state auditor. gov. pence man that important announcement this morning in the statehouse. >> that is great. first ever? [applause] excellent. scott? then we will open up for questions and comments. you are a police officer in san jose. you know that our party wants to get involved and the community level. it is something new, as far as doing this for three and half years straight. what advice would you give to our party about engaging in the community. in ausly, you are working community like that every day, the most important thing you do everyday. >> absolutely. the prevailing paradigm and law enforcement since the 1980's continued through today is community policing. that concept is predicated upon understanding the people that you surf. you cannot be an effective
officer, cannot serve your community if you do not understand the idiosyncratic needs and fears and hopes that each individual community has. it is all very different. it can literally differ from street to street, block to block. with respect to the political side, you have to be willing to go into the communities and engage people there. the best advice i could give it is, when you approached folks, you do not do it and tell them what they should be concerned about. you go there and you listen and find out what their concerns are first. it is only then that you open up the dialogue and you can start talking about larger issues. maybe make your points a little clearer. if you go in and simply say, we have to cut taxes for x, y, z, they may tune you out. the first thing you have to go -- do is go in and listen. >> as a police officer, i
imagine there are times when you have to find community leaders within a particular part of your community that will help you influence that community in order for you to be successful in whatever program you are trying to roll out, information you are trying to clean. >> absolutely. sometimes the most important programs, gang suppression, including former gang members, members of the community that can relate to the gang lifestyle. even though i deal with gang members on a daily basis, drug dealers and users on a daily basis, it is still hard to put yourself in that mind set to understand their lifestyle. we all bring to every situation our own perspective, colored by our own backgrounds. i think it is very important to bring community leaders and folks who have standing in that community into the fold if you want to be successful. >> questions?
ed cox has the first comment. give us some announcements. weiner comments. this is about former gov. eliot spitzer, a.k.a. client no.9. he decided he would run for comptroller of the city of new york. why would you want to do that? $140 billion pension funds. think about the power that gives to corporate america for his ideology. we have a candidate in john burnett that has been out there working hard. he rose from the housing projects in new york city to be one of the leading compliance officers on wall street, working for smith barney, and then merrill lynch. john, maybe you want to say a few words? [applause] >> thank you, chairman. i am the son of a preacher, so i
will try to be brief. i cannot promise you that i will not asking for a donation at the end. i have a 23-year career on wall street as a margin and a list, then work my way up. my parents were born in the south, under jim crow, and i was born in a household that did not tolerate excuses and complaints. to give you an example, my father said, after i complained about something -- you know what, i grew up and a household where you did two hours of toward before sunup, they walked 5 miles to school, 5 miles back, picked cotton before dinner, and then went straight to bed. after hearing that a thousand times, you say, okay, you go out with no complaints. i think i took that into
corporate america. i was able to work my way up to division manager at smith barney and director at merrill lynch before going back to school at night to retain my undergraduate and and be a. this is coming. :. during the time that i was earning my undergraduate degree at smith barney, there was eliot terror, unleashing his on wall street. i did not let him stop me then, and i refuse to let him stop me now. i am looking forward to representing new yorkers, and hopefully, i can be the only adult in this race and bring some integrity. i will try to be brief, but in closing, if i could just use a "if we could actually instill conservative values along with the pre--- free toket, that is the best path
prosperity or, -- prosperity. >> i am from virginia. scott, and is for apologize if you have written this. you mentioned edward snowden, and in the debate in the house, a lot of republican senators were on board with the justin amash amendment. where do you see that debate in the republican party and why are the democrats not having the same debate? >> there is a strong and prevalent chain of libertarianism through the party, and the issue of edward snowden resonates with those folks. i think the debate will center on a balance. you have to balance the civil liberties of u.s. citizens with the need to protect the country. that is something that, you know , i think you have to by and
large look at the big picture and say you know, is this program keeping us safe, and is doing so while being efficiently unobtrusive? that is really where the debate rests. i do not know how the debate will play out. it remains to be seen. >> i have three parts. does anybody know what sunday is -- a great milestone in republican history? it is a trick question. sharon knows. that is when a republican mail in tennessee cast the deciding vote to give women the right to vote. we need to embrace that, look at those points and constantly remind women, because we truly believe the more women know their history, the more women would run and run as republicans. it is important to embrace.
part, when you talk about fed not leading, do you think you should say it is the white house and the senate not leading, in the house, they have done a lot. >> people deserve a government that works. we have to continue to lead as a party, but we have to recognize we have many differences within our own party and we have to work across the aisle, we do not have to compromise on our principles. i stand by what i said. everyone is accountable. inn things do not go well the state of oklahoma, i do not play the blaming game. i take responsibility for it. that is what people in washington dc need to do and that is what the problem is, they have not taken responsibility. [applause] >> what do you think of the reagan 80% rule, those that
agree with us 80% are not our enemies? >> i think it is consistent. comment on that? we are all in agreement. the lawuld like to ask enforcement officer what local governments can do to support law enforcement? >> i think by and large local governments do a great job supporting governments. there is a lot going on with respect to budget issues, pension reforms and sometimes that creates divisions between public employees who would otherwise be conservative and elected officials who might be coming down on a different side of that issue. those things notwithstanding -- i think those things will be resolved at the end of the day -- republicans have by and large been our supporters. there is not more you can do other than continuing to do what you are doing.
you are far it is strange that you were strong enough to make a star you will never find peace of mind listen to your heart people you can never change the way they feel let them do just what they will for they will if you let them steal your heart from you people make a lover feel the full but you knew i loved you allould have shown them
coverage coming up tomorrow on c-span. amy klobuchartor will be speaking to north dakota democrats. she is a keynote speaker. past speakers include john edwards in 2006 and barack obama in 2007. hillary clinton is being honored, but she will not be there. saysdes moines register" senator amy klobuchar is the first democratic hopeful to visit iowa for a possible 2016 presidential campaign. her comments live tomorrow at 7:00 p.m. eastern. scrapped obama has joint military exercise scheduled for next month, saying american cooperation with egyptian government can not continue when civilians are being killed on the street. he directed his security team today. the white house released this photo of the president on a conference call with national
security staff. the president also had a statement on egypt earlier today. morning, everybody. i finished a discussion with my natural -- national security team and i wanted to provide an update. let me begin by stepping back for a moment. the relationship between the united states and egypt goes back to kate. it is rooted in our respect of egypt as a nation and an ancient center of civilization, and a cornerstone for peace in the middle east. it is also booted in our ties to the egyptian people, forged
through a long-standing partnership. americar two years ago, was inspired by the desire for change. millions took to the streets to defend their dignity and demand a government that was responsive to their aspirations for political freedom and economic opportunity. we said at the time change would not come quickly or easily, but we did align ourselves with a set of principles. nonviolence, and respect for universal rights, and a process for political and economic reform. in doing so, we were guided by values and also interest. we believe nations are more stable and successful when guided by those principles as well. that is why we are so concerned by recent events. we appreciate the complexity of the situation. while mohamed morsi was elected
president in a democratic election, his government was not inclusive and did not respect the views of all egyptians. we know that many egyptians, millions of egyptians, perhaps even a majority of egyptians were calling for a change in course. while we do not believe the course is -- force is the way to resolve the lyrical differences, after intervention, there remained a chance for reconciliation and the opportunity to pursue a democratic path. instead, we have seen a more dangerous path taken through arbitrary arrests, a crackdown on mohamed morsi's associations -- associates and supporters and now violence has taken the lives of hundreds of people. stronglyd states condemns the steps taken by the
interim government in egypt and security forces. we deplore violence against civilians. we support universal rights essential to human dignity, including the right to peaceful protest. we oppose the pursuit of martial law, which denies those rights to citizens under the principle that security trumps individual freedom. or that might makes right. and today the united states extends its condolences to the families of those who were killed and those who were wounded. given the depths of our partnership with egypt, our national security interests in this pivotal part of the world and our belief that engagement can support a transition back to a democratically elected civilian government, we have sustained our commitment to egypt and its people. but while we want to sustain our relationship with egypt, our traditional cooperation cannot continue as usual when civilians are being killed in the streets.
and rights are being rolled back. as a result, this morning we notified the egyptian government that we are canceling our biannual joint military exercise, which was scheduled for next month. going forward i have asked my national security team to assess the implications of the actions taken by the interim government, and further steps that we may take as necessary with respect to the u.s.-egyptian relationship. let me say that the egyptian people deserve better than what we have seen over the last several days. and to the egyptian people let me say the cycle of violence and escalation needs to stop. we call on the egyptian authorities to respect the universal rights of the people. we call on those who are protesting to do so peacefully and condemn the attacks that we have seen by protesters, including on churches. we believe that the state of
emergency should be lifted, that a process of national reconciliation should begin. that all parties need to have a voice in egypt's future. that the rights of women and religious minorities should be respected, and the commitments must be kept to pursue transparent reforms of the constitution and democratic elections make a parliament and president. in pursuing that path we'll help egypt meet the democratic aspirations of people while attracting the support to help deliver the opportunities to its citizens. violence on the other hand will only feed the cycle polarization that isolates egyptians from one another and from the world and that continues to hamper the opportunity for egypt to get back on the path of the economic growth. let me make one final point. america cannot determine the future of egypt. that's a task for the egyptian
people. we don't take sides with any particular party or political figure. i know it's tempting inside egypt to blame the united states or west or some other outside actor for what's gone wrong. we have been blamed by supporters of morsi. we have been blamed by the other side as if we are supporters of morsi. that kind of approach will do nothing to help egyptians achieve the future that they deserve. we want egypt to succeed. we want a peaceful democratic, prosperous egypt. that's our interest. but to achieve that the egyptians are going to have to do the work. we recognize that change changes time. and that a process like this is never guaranteed.
there are examples in recent history of countries that are transitioned out of a military government towards a democratic government, and it did not always go in a straight line and the process was not always smooth. there are going to be false starts. there will be difficult days. america's democratic journey took us through some mighty struggles to perfect our union. from asia to the americas, we know that democratic transitions are measured not in months or even years, but sometimes in generations. so in the spirit of mutual interest and mutual respect, i want to be clear that america wants to be a partner in the egyptian people's pursuit of a better future, and we are guided by our national interest in this long-standing relationship. but our partnership must also advance the principles that we believe in.
and that so many egyptians have sacrificed for these last several years, no matter what party or faction they belong to. so america will work with all those in egypt and around the world who support a future of stability that rests on the foundation of justice and peace and dignity. >> theyou very much. president earlier today, with his first statement on the rapidly deteriorating situation in egypt where spiraling violence has left more than 500 people dead. the violence prop did the egyptian government to declare a nationwide state of emergency and a nighttime curfew. the president spoke from martha's in your in massachusetts -- vineyard in massachusetts where he is vacationing. at 2:00 p.m. eastern, we will be live at the johns hopkins school on the u.s.-south korea nuclear cooperation agreement. townhall isan's
asking who is the future of your political party. here's some of what you will see. in 2013, eric two gubernatorial races in the united states -- new jersey, where chris christie is claiming to a lead over his hapless democratic opponent. >> i think he clearly outweighs -- [laughter] outweighs most, let's be clear. he will win. i will say this about chris christie. there are a lot of conservatives that are not enamored with him, but come to new jersey, and i think you would understand that regardless of what you think of him on a national stage, he is exactly what new jersey has needed. is the best best thing to happen to my state in my time. the state has been run by bullies for decades.
tenacious,tie is a truculent, and a bit of a bully from time to time, but that is what we needed. in virginia when there is also a gubernatorial contest, and speaking only on my own behalf, not urging any of you to support withdates in compliance the tax law, i will say that can coach nellie is a strong conservative and he is in a tough fight with terry mcauliffe. it will be a tossup. it will be very ugly, and there are a lot of undecided voters. if you are on the sidelines thinking about what you will do this year, ken is probably in more need of help then chris christie. moved one remiss if i from 2013 without pointing out at last i heard, there are a couple of elections on september 10 here in colorado. [applause]
those will be fascinating to watch. i was getting some of the insight dynamics about those last night at dinner from some state senators, the you probably know more about that than i do. let's look at 2014. >> just for context, the colorado constitution has provided that we, the people, may petition to fire a state legislator in the middle of his term foruse or senate cause as the people may see fit. it just does not have to be malfeasance. senator john morris, democrat of colorado springs, happens to be the and are on thet, ballot to be recalled because of objections by their constituents
to the gun-grabbing vote they cast, some would say at the behest of new york mayor michael bloomberg. it has never been in the history of colorado that state legislatures have been fired by we the people on a midterm. that is what he means by september 10. [applause] >> indeed. on the topic of new york city, it is interesting that you have a mayor who is a slippery--- he mightgrammar, and be replaced by america's most famous amateur photographer. >> you will see more on this. future of who is the your political party. we will also take your calls and tweets. that is live from 7:00 p.m. until 9:00 p.m. eastern.
>> what is interesting about washington in this age is once you have that title, even if it is a short title, even if you have been voted out after one term, you can stay in washington and be a former chief of staff, ismer congressman, and that marketable. you are in the club. that is a striking departure from the days in which people would come to washington to serve, serve a little bit, then go back to the farm, which is how the founders had intended it. there is a new dynamic, and a lot of it starts with money and the resources available. ,> sunday night, mark leibovich with an insiders look at the business of government, and media in washington at 8:00 p.m. on c-span's "q&a." haveian authorities
authorized deadly force to protect police forces. theinterior secretary says new measures, after supporters of the deposed islamist president torched pivotable local buildings. governmentthe declared a state of emergency and a nighttime curfew after a deadly crackdown on ousted supporters holding citizens and nationwide clashes that left more than 500 people dead. the former special envoy to africa for egypt says the state of emergency is an effort to gain control and home the violence. he was in washington yesterday as a guest of the middle east institute.
>> one thing we are hoping for is for a wealthy donor to give us a new conference space so we will not be as crowded in the future. i am with the middle east institute. i would like to welcome you to today's talk featuring ad, who is visiting roadmapro to share the i headed for egypt after a tumultuous path. he is also here to hear the views from the washington perspective, analysts,
government officials, and to convey views and concerns back to cairo. i welcome this opportunity for an exchange, a dialogue, and we are very honored that he has agreed to join a -- join us today to share his thoughts. as you know, we have launched a program called the arab transitions initiative with a focus on egypt, and since april, we have been programming extensively, highlighting the range and diversity of voices and opinions from egypt in an attempt to shed light on the very complex transitions taking place in egypt, and two underscore the diversity of voices in the country. we welcome the mall. all of that said, the exchange comes on a grim day where a has led to many deaths
and the spread of violence on both sides. it is a day that raises many questions and concerns about the future of egypt. inis on the mind of many egypt. thes an account pushed format and civil servant, having served as ambassador to the eu. he has held prominent positions assistant on the economic relations. he has also been a member of parliament and served as chairman of the foreign relations committee in the people's assembly. he most recently served as a special envoy to africa for the interim president adly mansour. it is a pleasure to welcome you, mr. ambassador. i would like to welcome you to the stage.
>> good afternoon. while i was told that i have to for bullets and bombs coming from everywhere. we are not opposing numbers. i am here especially to meet the representatives of big banks and civil society. we thought it is important that we have open channels to deal with the very distinguished representatives of the civil society, particularly the middle east institute and in fact, yesterday the situation had been very much different. the situation today is different. i know that everybody is having an impression, a reaction.
all of us are following the tickers coming from here and there. my advice was, hold your breath. because, what you may have heard from sources is different from what i have heard. it is a little bit too soon to judge. let's focus a little bit on what happened in the past year. very briefly, because this is very important. i will try to be brief in order to allow for discussion and questions. so i can answer nicely as well. on the 29th of june, 2012, former president morsi was elected. democratically.
the egyptian people despite the controversy surrounding this election, and some allegations that there were mistakes here and there, the egyptian people had accepted that he is an elected president. since we are starting a new democratic civil country, that was a real experience in our history. real democracy, real elections, real -- that was the civil -- first civil regime. there was a kind of -- between the people and the president. people knew in advance that president morsi was not chosen because he is dr. morsi, but he
was coming to egypt as a representative of the muslim brothers. people knew that this is a risky business. he promised that he is here to be the president of all egyptians, and we decided to believe him. in the interest of the country itself. what happened? we will go through the past year very quickly. how was egypt on the 29th of june of 2012 -- 2013? one, severe polarization of the country. and environment of discrimination, exclusion on religion basis. not only between muslims and christians, but between muslims
and muslims, between sunni and shiite. between anyone who is not muslim brother and muslim brothers. for the first time, we found that this kind of polarization is affecting the human relations between the people themselves. we found egypt and later, which is very well known with peaceful attitude is changing. second, complete absence of security. rate of crime has risen dramatically. people started to feel for the first time in the history of egypt that we are unsafe. why? because the police was fragmented. you know what happened in january, when the whole prisons
were opened and weapons were smuggled and all prisoners were out. this is another long story. the fact is, security was rather absent. you felt that if you go out -- some of you maybe were subjected to certain harassment or whatever. three, egypt, as much as i know, it has a potential. we have resources. we have certain sources of wealth and development. we have been seeing a deteriorating economy.
we were rated -ccc -- egypt was on the brink to be declared a bankrupt country. why? not because of lack of resources. not because people are unwilling to work. it is simply because the whole productive life was paralyzed. we had this kind of anarchy, i would say social anarchy. people are taking to the street, feeling that while under what we think is democracy, in fact it was determined as absence of law. the country was heading toward bankruptcy. with this kind of anarchy and economic deterioration, and the social fragmentation, we were on the verge of being declared -- egypt, this great country, as we
know has an 85 million population, on the verge of being declared like somalia. more of concern was this return of a nightmare which is terrorism. what was happening in sinai, we thought that we were finished with terrorism. we found that terrorists are being brought from outside. al qaeda, jihadi, all these kind of islamist movements are back. they are well armed with all kinds of weapons that go beyond individual weapons. with connections with other neighboring entities, we found
that there is a smuggling of weapons to egypt in big quantities. the answer came after the revolution, simply that before dr. morsi eschewed his presidency, there were taxes that stopped immediately after he assumed his presidency. the answer came from one of their leaders. i'm talking about after 30th of june. he said, i heard it by my own
ears, that the attacks in sinai will be stopped immediately once morsi is back so this is self- explanatory. to make the story clear and short, the people of egypt came to the conclusion that we will not accept that this country will be ruled by a religious agenda, by a group which is armed with weapons, a group that they are misinterpreting islam and providing islam as a religion of very, very uncivilized values, bringing the whole country back to the middle ages. they cannot continue having this country completely paralyzed. they thought that if he was given the mandate to be the president, they came to the
conclusion that enough is enough. it was the people, not anybody else. they have asked for early presidential elections. i think that was the right of the people to express their interests democratically. the situation was very clear, that you are approaching a point where the people, the majority of egyptian people are expressing their views of a change of the regime, and a regime that has waited for 80 years for such an opportunity. they will not accept democratically the will of the people. the confrontation was on the
horizon. it was clear that the confrontation was coming, no matter what. being the only power, consolidated power, and the country, i mean the military. this is their responsibility to try to find a way out of this deep crisis. that is why it gave all forces a chance in order to reach a compromise, a way out politically. week has come, no answer, no response whatsoever. another 48 hours, then came the
reaction. what was the reaction? the reaction came from the former president himself. he said, either me in power or in front of the eyes of the whole world. it was clear that choices have been decided, either re- contradict or the people will accept that their wishes will not be listened to, or bloodshed. the choice was either to wait for confrontation to take place or to prevent this confrontation. this is what happened. i know this long discussion whether it is coup d'etat or revolution, i think we are wasting our time. what happened happened. millions and millions and millions of people took to the street supporting. what is important, the point
that you should focus on is whether the military ruled or not or took over or not. in fact, what happened, they did not take power for a single minute. what happened after this announcement, there was a meeting between forces including the pope, the grand mosque, and all political parties. the muslim brothers were invited as a party to this meeting. they rejected. what happened? this political forces sat down and drafted a roadmap that was implemented instantly from minute one. according to the constitution, the head of the supreme constitution court was appointed as interim president. a cabinet was composed. it doesn't include any representatives from the
military except the minister of defense. yesterday, the constitution committee was composed, and by the way, they have accepted conditionally to take part in this committee. there is a reconciliation committee that has already started. we have a kind of timeframe, that within 7-9 months we should have elections, presidential elections, and we should have a new president elected by the
people by the end of nine months. what happened since then was remembering that the country is economically getting to a very serious situation. not only declaration of bankruptcy, you can have a kind of implosion. with the kind of anarchy and economic deterioration, you can have a kind of implosion in the country with the policy, the high rates of crime. the situation, the government wanted to move ahead in order to work as a civilian cabinet to put the country on a development path. a democratic path. a civilian path. the reaction was that what we have been seeing, this sit in in the squares, we knew that is the
best kind of reaction but the government has waited. you have seen hours of mediation trying to find a common understanding, a way out that they will not be excluded from the political process and there was no reaction whatsoever. the reaction was very negative. they rejected completely to abandon their ideology and to act as a normal politcal force in egypt. that protest -- just imagine here in washington, you have
demonstrators people sitting for weeks, occupying a large area which is becoming larger and larger. government forces are refraining from even coming close to them because we know that they are very well armed. i hope you have seen it today on the tv. tons of weapons are there. in fact, they are interested in having this kind of confrontation because they believe that this is in their favor. that is the ideal situation that would conveying their voice that there is a real resistance. for them, this is not enough,
but to have a confrontation and bloodshed, they don't care. meanwhile, there is a tremendous pressure from the people. they are asking the government to intervene. no matter how long you wait, if you keep quiet, they will invent any kind of problems and violations because it is not in their favor to keep quiet nor to compromise, because for them this is a failure of their agenda. i know that you will ask about how that intervention took place. we can discuss this matter extensively, but i am talking about more important situations that a big country with this big population is being a hostage. we were a hostage with a group of people who are occupying
certain areas, paralyzing life, and imposing a real threat on the development efforts. no one single investor would come while seeing this sit in everywhere. not a single tourist would come to the country while feeling afraid of what he or she could be subjected to. so the situation, people have advised we should be patient. for how long? knowing that if you become patient, they will not let you wait. this is what happened. what happened yesterday, i think what is really important and i want you to listen to this, one, the crowd was dispersed very peacefully in one square. you know why. there were no weapons there.
the weapons were accumulated in the big square where they started. but, the moment the police intervened, what was the reaction? apart from what is happening in the square itself, we found that throughout egypt, attacks on the churches, they have attacked more than 20 churches. government buildings, so on, it means that they are spreading anarchy. they want to distract the police from intervening. they are trying to attack the people everywhere, not -- i was just on the phone with the people in cairo.
civilian people, not the government. the people are so scared because they are attacking even people in the street. for those who have been dispersed, they are attacking people in the street. we are going through a difficult moment. this is a threat that has been hidden and then became -- came from underground to the surface. this is a very serious threat not only to egypt. in fact, i am not the one who would think for the united states, but for a group that is being religiously motivated with this kind of violent attitude and with these kind of weapons they are armed with, we have to
see how that could help in combating terrorism. terrorism -- we have seen them in sinai. they are raising al qaeda flags. no country would listen to the advice to be patient. in fact, what happened, we not only waited -- what happened, and i assure you that my colleagues will never take initiative to use weapons, and wait and see to see what took place there. i wish you had seen the tons of weapons that have been confiscated from the square. we are going through a difficult moment, but we believe that even
in the coming weeks will be rather difficult, but we are sure that with popular support that we are having, with the popular determination that we have to go on as a democratic civil country, not a country that will be ruled by an agenda that will take us to the middle ages. we deserve democracy. we deserve development. we deserve prosperity. we deserve relations with all the powers of the world. here i come to the final point. i know there are certain feelings about difficult times in our relationship. i think this is quite logical.
one of the -- of being here, i am here to listen. if you want to criticize me, go ahead. we have friends. we know very much that it is not only that the united states is the strongest power in the world, it is the only superpower in the world. i was ambassador to russia and i have seen how the world order has changed from bipolar too unipolar and this is different from any country in the world. we know that. we know as well that egypt is important to the united states. not because you love us, but because there are interests. the middle east is of great importance.
area in the center of the world. it is -- we have the suez canal, the middle east, israel, palestine, so many nations associated with egypt, and it is important that a relationship between egypt and the united states should be based on mutual respect. a big margin of differing but being friends as well. that is why i am here, to listen, to explain. i tried, i know that you have warned me not to be -- i am trying to leave time for questions. so, i thought that i should just have -- i'm sorry if it was a little bit long. we can have not necessarily questions rather than discussion. we need to get into a discussion. i want to listen to you without being prejudiced. let's not be prejudiced, neither me nor you. let's try to be logical and understanding.
among friends, it is not that we are picking on each other. we are in a difficult moment. don't jump to conclusions. i am listening to your question. >> [inaudible] >> mohamed el baradei has resigned as vice president. how does this change your thinking about this difficult moment? how does this change your thinking about what you learn from your colleagues in the recent 24 hours? how does this change the situation politically for egypt? >> mohamed el baradei is free to do that. he has been asking for peaceful means and so forth.
but there is the voice of the people. the people have been asking that you have to bring the situation to an end. we want to have the country moving on. it is not a disaster. we owe him a great respect. he is a friend as well. in any regime, if somebody would resign, that should not make it a kind of change in the situation. the situation has changed because there is a direct effort by the government to bring a chaotic situation to an end. we hope that from now on we will continue containing this crisis.
to limit all kinds of casualties as much as we can. >> baradei's resignation reflects growing concern that this government is carrying out tactics that they don't approve of, that it is looking more like a security state. my question to you is about long-term thinking about the islamists. how the government has been giving with the sit in. at some point they have to bring islamists into the political process. it seems to many here in washington that a military situation only makes them
stronger, drives them underground and pushes them to resort to violence. how do today's actions support the demands of the people for a more inclusive democratic egypt? >> thank you very much. you have to make it for a clear that being an islamist is not a crime. we are not against islam. we are against those who are adopting violence as a means of action. you should remember that we have in egypt two arms for islamist groups. you have the muslim brother movement and the party. the party is recognized as officially registered and was invited more than once to join the political association. that invitation is still open. we know that they are part of the egyptian people we cannot
just assume they don't exist. we are inviting them, provided you have to abide by regulations. you have to abide by the rule of law. there is no violence. you cannot accept that because of reconciliation that you will accept an armed group to join the political process. i need to confirm. that was declared even in cairo. they are invited to be part of the political process. here, i want to make a point. they say, we would like to have a civil government, they say, we too. civil government means what?
a civil country with a democracy, so on. there is always room for a kind of exchange between how we would run the country. they were not there to impose a religious agenda and they are not there to govern egypt with tariffs. >> are there any questions from the press? >> i know it is early days and the situation is still unclear, but there are credible reports of over 100 protesters dead. i know you said the country couldn't wait forever for these protests to die down. do you not accept that it could have been handled in a better way? >> i wish you could tell me. if you wait for five or six weeks, and with all kind of persuasion you are adopting. your inviting them and even william burns, lady ashton,
ministers here and there, talking to them. this is an important point to highlight, this kind of international attention helps -- rather than helps to get compromise, it gives them more support to go on their own path just see the scenario after the police have intervened in order to -- see the scenario that the reaction to attack different parts of the country. that means that have -- they have compared plants, which would happen no matter when. this agent is one that i agree with, we wish there was no
intervention whatsoever, but the fact is the country is paralyzed and the country -- you have 83 million people are angry and are pressuring the government that we cannot live under this situation anymore. and you may listen to reports from here and there. i would assure you again that there is no one single initiative to shoot at the muslim brotherhood. we are getting reports from algiers or a -- from al jazeera and others. according to official sources, it is different from the one they are declaring. wonderful ways of communicating. had it been possible that there is other means to adopt an order to avoid any kind of
confrontation, we would have done it. but we have reached the moment where we had no choice. ask any more media? when are you speaking of the statemente released strongly condemning the use of violence against protesters and strongly condemning the return of the emergency law, what do you make of that troubling signal? >> i find it logical. of course. i do not see that as something unexpected. wait to assess the situation. as a spontaneous reaction from what you can witness or what you see in the news, that is the responsibility that the administration should make a statement. that does not mean that we have come to the final position.
i would like to remind you that that is the beginning of the of theion, the position administration was different from the one that was declared later by john kerry, secretary of state, so the situation is changing. i do not want to take it as an offense. we have to mature our relations that go about this kind of spontaneous and emotional reactions. they made a statement. we listen to it, and we will have to respond. i am trying to explain, but more explanations are needed until we see we can together -- we know the united states is interested to have a diesel, democratic egypt. they want to help. it is only normal they are concerned and. we may differ on the kind of judgment, but it is not any kind of continuance of understanding
between both parties. >> in the back here. ask about the state of emergency, because that is something in egypt that has a great eel of history. is the justification behind that, and do you think that is a wise step to take? andet me tell you everybody. we have to stop talking about the past. we have a future. we have a revolution. we are going through a difficult moment. duringbarak' 00 time, people did not have a say in it. do not take egypt only as a regime or government. take people as people. take egypt as people.
there is a new factor, the egyptian people. you have shown great respect to the revolution. we cannot understand why is this appreciation not similar in -- but we know how much you appreciate the egyptian people, culturally, historically, and as a civilized people. in answer to your question, i was talking to my daughter. people are scared because those who have escaped from the squares are attacking everywhere. they are attacking shops, homes, houses, people in the street, and they are a kind of hysteric reaction and that is why in order to protect people you have to impose it. we hate it. we do not like it. i gree we have bad -- i agree we have bad memories with this. if that were to happen, god
forbid, in any other place, that is the normal reaction for a country to protect the people that you have to impose emergency. that is too much for five minutes. >> thanks so much. that thelieve continued detention of mohamed morsi is helping or hurting the situation? you talked about exhausting all alternatives. his detention and release seem to be one option. ask all white. -- >> all right. , a legala kind of case case in the courts, but forget that. let's assume that is not true or that he is innocent. let's think logically. we release him and put him back to his house -- what would happen?
his supporters would go there and you would have a demonstration and you would have another demonstration of his opponents. then you are creating -- even to cook protect his own life, correct? humanely, that is personal, and i am talking about my personal opacity. that is something that with the kind of tension, had it been that he was removed and went back home and his supporters noepted it, there would be problem, but you have seen since his deposition, the kind of reaction in the street. and the violence that has been used -- i do not know i would say that it is not viewed the we have democracy, and that is why we tend to listen to the opposition rather than the government. this is what happened. i am telling you that what the government is saying today is
accountable to the people. nobody can live today because the people have their eyes open. they cannot. the situation now that we were unable to do that if he even was is detained legally now. not in his house. he is detained legally because he has a case. i do not want to get into this because it is up to the judiciary. nevertheless i think it would have been a very risky business to free him and he will never accept that. ask your representatives to met him what he said. you know what he said? i am the legitimate president. he said iease him, will have to go back to my office, i will have to go to the palace and then we assume power. he would have complicated the
situation. i would like to -- [indiscernible] quick question. >> could you introduce yourself. >> phoenix tv. have called onn the u.s. government to cut off aid. the, what is the purpose of his visit to egypt? fizzles --e a officials here? >> i came here to see you. i came here in order to meet the think tanks as i can. it is a short mission. it is important to listen to you, because coming back with information and questions and concerns, with criticism, even
bitterness, and this is very important. we have an ambassador here and the embassy is active, but still have a kind of face-to-face discussion like the one we had today is very important, and tomorrow i will see the minister of foreign affairs or maybe the prime minister and tell them where we are because the u.s. is a priority for us. i have been advising my colleagues. this is an issue that is being extremely mishandled. every time we have a misunderstanding, we hear we will have to cut aid. aid -- who said that aid is only in egypt's interest? why you keep using this as a stick, that if you do not
behave, if you are not a good boy, i will hit you? we feel very much offended about this kind of argument. i know the justification. i know this is a means, but this is not a way to undertake respectable relations between equal countries. is not a charity. it is not a charity. you have to forget about that. it is a means for capturing clicks for achieving the interests of both countries. that is why because the people are mature and logically and politically mature, window vote was put to the voters, they voted in favor of aid because it is not because they like us. i hope they will. nevertheless, because they know that this is in the mutual interests of both countries. the gentleman, because although he might be -- bankrupt international.
you noted bill burns'trip to egypt, his meetings last week. sides have criticized u.s. role. to you think the u.s. has a role somelping egypt to find way to reconciliation, or should we stay out of it? >> i do, but it depends on what. of course, i said u.s. is the u.s. states, and of course, their role is indispensable, but it depends. why do they criticize? that is the first part of your question, because, friendly speaking, the moment you made the first statement by the
administration in the aftermath of the incident in june was a shock for the egyptian people because they remembered how beforeas your position the incident in january, and they found you had a different proposition, and that was a big disappointment. care, we had to criticize this. to complete the story, because our statement has changed once. john kerry said now we understand the situation, now we si'srstand that mor government was not democratic, that it was the will of the people you will have to respect. the whole situation has been changed. now, i want to discuss with you what you mean by reconciliation.
when we talk about reconciliation, as if you are talking in a normal situation between two or three or four political powers, in fact, and what you are talking about is between the majority of the powery or an executive among the police, the army, judiciary, media, the government. the people are the one side and the muslim brothers are the other. when you talk about there is noon as if revolution that has happened. however, i accept reconciliation on the assumption that you will have to find a way out in order egyptians -- they are and they want them back as egyptians who are taking part in the development of the country. by legal rules, by the rule of law, by human rights, by writes, by minorities'
respecting women's rights, by respecting the rules of the game. thank you for being here. i am from reporters without borders. what is your thought on the asation of the media -- documented by government security? >> you spoke very quickly. i did not get it. >> i apologies. -- my apologies. there has been a great deal of harassment of journalists by morsi supporters as well as by government forces who have been in the coverage of the situation. what are your thoughts on this with regard to government forces? , i condemn it.e this is really that. but the problem is, you know, the media people have such an
crowdse to get into the of areate something out policeman would think that to protect them is to push him forcefully away from demonstration, or to take him away, they are getting them to disperse the people and the problem with a photographer or a mediaman that tries to be on the spot. what i mean, it is bad. i reject it officially and personally. it isu have to appreciate something that you think of a situation where complete anarchy -- with weapons on the other sides -- you have to remember this. they have weapons. and they are shooting against the people. i understand there are journalists who were killed because they used weapons.
before, thethis guards of any president, especially the u.s. president. if anybody stands in the way, they just blow him away. it is bad, it is negative, but we have to appreciate that it was something that beyond their control and maybe had resort to it on the thesetion to protect people and keep them away from the crowds. this side, this gentleman. one of the major incidents before morsi was taken out of people attacked shias in a city. shias were not included in the
interim roadmap counsel. what is the role of shias in egypt moving forward? good question, but before i try to answer it, i want to remind you the statement made by former president two weeks before he was deposed, -- they werelims all islamists who attended this undeclared meeting, right? and the shias were attacked presence. in his he does not make a one single word. what happened later on? killed in a most uncivilized manner, and you know that. they were tortured. idea where the
country was heading to. that is what i said. has been theion umbrella that is governing the country. shias are very few in egypt, very few, just a few numbers. theydoes not mean that should be deprived of their rights to be part of the political process. and i think it would depend very much on them to take the first step in order to express their join thess to political process. but i assume that at this stage lack of in a state of understanding. they do not know how -- at least they want to protect themselves. and to be protected from the
sunni attacks. they were not interested in the political process, rather, to be protected. a question from the overflow room. interim government treats the ngo's will be an issue. ngo'sis a hope that the will be handled in a more enlightened fashion. >> one of the objections of my visit to meet think tanks and ngo's. i have to tell you that we are in egypt,35,000 ngo's and this is a big number compared with the number of the population. and i personally believe they have a huge force and very becauset role to play,
in so many indications they are much better than the government. they can reach the people, they can deal with the poverty, education, women, children, with health. thata power, if neglected, should be a kind of great shortcoming by the government. venture to say that this government, the understanding of the role of the ngo, you will see such a positive attitude that even the law is being reviewed so farr.
it is not only the ngo's. if you believe we are heading to path, then youc will have to include the ngo's as part of the democracy, because they are one of the best expressions of democracy. if you allow ngo's and civil society to work, that means we will have to refuse to hear different views, and not that the government is doing everything, that you have to delegate authority, you have to get into a partnership with ngo's. >> president obama says america's traditional cooperation with egypt cannot continue as usual in light of the violence there. he is canceling what military exercises that were scheduled to start next month and asked his security team to ask what other options might be
necessary. earlier today the president made a statement on the situation in egypt. it is about eight minutes. >> good morning, everybody. just finished a discussion with my national security team about the situation in egypt, and i wanted to provide an update about our response to an events of the last couple days. the relationship between the united states and egypt goes back decades. it is rooted in our spec of ancient a nation, an center of a civilization, and a cornerstone for peace in the middle east. in our ties toed the egyptian people, forge through a long-standing partnership. ago, america years
was inspired by the egyptian asple's desire for change millions of egyptians took to the street, to defend their dignity, and demand the government was responsive to their aspirations for political freedom and economic activity. we said at the time that the change would not come quickly or easily, but we did align ourselves with a set of principles -- nonviolence, a respect for universal rights, and a process for political and economic reform. in doing so we were guided by values, but also by interests, because we believe asians are more stable and more successful when they are guided by those principles as well. that is why we are so concerned by recent events. we appreciate the complexity of the situation. while mohamed morsi was elected president in a democratic election, his government was not
inclusive and did not respect the views of all egyptians. we know that many egyptians, millions of egyptians, perhaps even a majority, are calling for a change in course, and while we do not believe that force is the way to resolve political differences him after the military's intervention several weeks ago, there remained a chance for reconciliation and an opportunity pursuit -- to pursue a democratic path. instead, we have seen a more dangerous path taken through arbitrary arrests, a rod crackdown on mr. morsi's associations and supporters, and now, tragically, violence has taken the lives of hundreds of people and wounded thousands of more. the united states surely condemns the steps that have been taken by egypt's interim government and security forces. we deplore violence against
civilians. we support universal rights essential to human dignity, including the right bees will protest. we oppose the pursuit of martial law. this denies rights to citizens under the principle that security trumps individual freedom. makes right. today the united states extends its condolences to the families of those who were killed and those who were wounded. given the depths of our partnership with egypt, our in this partrity of the world and our belief that there can be a democratically elected government, we sustain our commitment to their people. tole we want first -- sustain our relationship, our cooperation cannot continue as usual when civilians are being killed in the streets. as a result.
as a result, this morning we notified the egyptian government that we are canceling our biannual joint military exercise, which was scheduled for next month. going forward i have asked my national security team to assess the implications of the actions taken by the interim government, and further steps that we may take as necessary with respect to the u.s.-egyptian relationship. let me say that the egyptian people deserve better than what we have seen over the last several days. and to the egyptian people let me say the cycle of violence and escalation needs to stop. we call on the egyptian authorities to respect the universal rights of the people. we call on those who are protesting to do so peacefully and condemn the attacks that we have seen by protesters, including on churches. we believe that the state of emergency should be lifted, that a process of national reconciliation should begin.
that all parties need to have a voice in egypt's future. that the rights of women and religious minorities should be respected, and the commitments must be kept to pursue transparent reforms of the constitution and democratic elections make a parliament and president. in pursuing that path we'll help egypt meet the democratic aspirations of people while attracting the support to help deliver the opportunities to its citizens. violence on the other hand will only feed the cycle polarization that isolates egyptians from one another and from the world and that continues to hamper the opportunity for egypt to get back on the path of the economic growth. let me make one final point. america cannot determine the future of egypt. that's a task for the egyptian people. we don't take sides with any particular party or political figure. i know it's tempting inside
egypt to blame the united states or the west or some other outside actor for what's gone wrong. we have been blamed by supporters of morsi. we have been blamed by the other side as if we are supporters of morsi. that kind of approach will do nothing to help egyptians achieve the future that they deserve. we want egypt to succeed. we want a peaceful democratic, prosperous egypt. that's our interest. but to achieve that the egyptians are going to have to do the work. we recognize that change changes time. and that a process like this is never guaranteed. there are examples in recent history of countries that are transitioned out of a military government towards a democratic government, and it did not
always go in a straight line and the process was not always smooth. there are going to be false starts. there will be difficult days. america's democratic journey took us through some mighty struggles to perfect our union. from asia to the americas, we know that democratic transitions are measured not in months or even years, but sometimes in generations. so in the spirit of mutual interest and mutual respect, i want to be clear that america wants to be a partner in the egyptian people's pursuit of a better future, and we are guided by our national interest in this long-standing relationship. but our partnership must also advance the principles that we believe in. and that so many egyptians have sacrificed for these last several years, no matter what party or faction they belong to. so america will work with all those in egypt and around the world who support a future of stability that rests on the foundation of justice and peace
and dignity. >> mr.ou very much. president, will you cut off aid question mark what will be your policy? the president from martha's vineyard earlier today. the picture from the pentagon this afternoon where we expect a briefing on sexual assault in the military. we will have it live. on egypt, chuck hagel has offered a statement. he says in part to date called the egyptian minister of defense to discuss the relationship, and since the crisis began the united states has made it clear the egyptian government must refrain from violence and move toward an inclusive political transition. recent developments including the violence that resulted in hundreds of deaths has undermined those principles.
on sexual assault in the military. and he gets underway we will have live coverage. while we wait, u.s. energy discussion this morning, and whether or not the president will approve the keystone xl pipeline. there is news from egypt and we want to get your calls and comments on the situation in egypt. we get reports that the muslim brotherhood has called for another round of demonstrations to take place today in and around cairo. this is the video of the scene yesterday as the protesters killed or injured more than 3500. the headline this morning, egyptian forces kill scores of protesters. paper,m another bloodshed in egypt.
some of the carnage taking place around cairo. john kerry talked about all of this yesterday. here is part of what he had to say. [video clip] parties share responsibility to avoid violence and participate in a productive path toward a political solution. there will not be a solution through further polarization. there can only be a political solution by bringing people together with a political solution. this is a pivotal moment for all egyptians. onlyassport file it leads to greater instability. economic disaster and suffering. the only sustainable path for either side is one towards a political solution. i am convinced from my conversations today with a number of foreign ministers, including the foreign minister of egypt, i am convinced that path is in fact still open and
it is possible, although it is much harder, much work complicated by the events of today. the promise of the 2011 revolution has simply never been fully realized. and the final outcome of that revolution is not yet decided. it will be shaped in the hours ahead, in the days ahead. it will be shaped i the decisions which all of egypt cost political leaders make now and in these days ahead. the world is closely watching egypt and is deeply concerned about the events that we have witnessed today. the united states remains at the ready to work with all of the parties and with our partners and with others around the world in order to help achieve a peaceful, democratic wave forward. yesterday on the situation in egypt.
you can also send us a tweet or join us on facebook. the white house announced that the president will have remarks scheduled at about 10:15 eastern time. we will have live coverage. he is expected to speak about the situation in egypt. as a story this morning, frontpage, a day of bloodshed rocks egypt, and an editorial from the new york times, oteri madness in cairo. washington must distance itself from the egyptian destructive generals. the streetsdbath in of cairo, leaders have demonstrated they have no aptitude for an little interest in guiding their country back to
democracy. on the contrary, the political general andh's of a the brutal repression he has unleashed now threaten to produce the worst of all possible outcomes to an already inflamed situation -- a murderous civil war. are quotations from other newspapers. one photographic -- go live to the pentagon. >> that afternoon. eliminating sexual a start from remainsexual assault top priorities. every service member deserves a safe and ferment where they are
free from the threat of sexual harassment and assault. the secretary will continually evaluate and improve our programs. the secretary designed to strengthen our programs in the areas of accountability, command climate, victim advocacy, and safety. today he directed the implementation of the following additional measures to improve support them a strengthen pretrial investigations, enhance oversight, and make prevention response efforts were consistent across the live services. programseating legal that will provide legal representation for victims throughout the digital process. next, ensuring that all pretend rock hearings of charges are conducted by jack officers. third, inviting commanders with options to transfer service
members accused of sexual assault in order to eliminate continued contact while respecting rights of victims and accused. first flaghat the officer within the chain of command received reports on sexual assault incidents in responses. directing the od inspector closel's to evaluate sexual assault investigations. standardizing prohibitions on inappropriate behavior between recruiters and trainers and andnees across dod, developing and proposing changes to the manual for courts martial that would have victims giving input during the sentencing phases of the court-martial. all of these measures will provide victims with additional rights and protections and legal support and help ensure that relatedssault investigations and proceedings are conducted thoroughly and professionally.
the department of defense has established an independent panel in accordance with the national offense authorization act for 2013 and this panel is reviewing and assessing the systems used to investigate, prosecute, and adjudicate crimes involving sexual assault and related offenses under the uniform code of military justice. secretary hagel has met with members and will review the recommendations when complete. sexual assault is a dane on the honor of our men and women who serve our country. also to the threat of discipline and cohesion of our force. it must be stamped out. weeklyry hagel will meet with the senior leadership team to personally review efforts and ensure that directives and programs are being implemented effectively and the department will continue to work closely with both congress and the white house on eliminating sexual assault in the united states
military. we are all accountable to fix this problem. we will fix it together. with that, i will turn it over to my colleagues. good afternoon. i am the acting undersecretary of defense for personnel readiness. that secretarye hagel understands the problem and understand the concrete actions are important not just words. as you heard from mr. little, the secretary directed immediate implementation of additional measures to gain greater consistency of effort across the military services. these measures will incorporate the best actresses of the services and make them common throughout the armed forces, enhance the quality of the investigative and legal process and improve victim support. we are committed to a dynamic
and responsive sexual assault are mentioned program. through the multidisciplined program, we constantly work to identify new ways to prevent sexual assault as well as respond effectively and appropriately should a crime occur. our prevention and response are not static. we continually evaluate our programs and seek ways for the department to improve them in. the department and military leaders at all levels continued to assess the current policies, identify the need for change, and seek methods to improve her mentioned and response efforts. there is an unprecedented level of senior leader engagement on these issues, and they are committed -- we are committed to seeking feedback and incorporating those improvements to the victims. responders unit commanders as well as members of congress are the commander in
chief. this is the bottom line. the bottom line is sexual assault is not tolerated, not condoned, it is not ignored, and everyone in the department, from the newest and list the to the secretary of defense and everyone in between are responsible to uphold our values and continued an environment of things in the and respect for all. thank you. good afternoon. thank you for the opportunity to address you today in this important topic. sexual assault and a range of inappropriate behavior associated with it is a problem in the military. it erodes the trust that is the bedrock of our professional -- profession. sexual assault is a crime. it demands appropriate accountability. where full committed to combating sexual harassment and
sexual assault in our legs. andrman, service chiefs, commanders have taken swift action to reduce the incidence, true improve victim support and bring perpetrators to justice. we are taking more action today and we will continue to assess and adapt in the future. the secretary of defense initiatives announced today improve our ability to combat the assault by standardizing support and protection. this elevates oversight and improving investigations. it provides our commitment to improve our ability to prevent and respond to sexual assault. over recent months, we have let frequently and -- looked freakily in doj taking best practices from our communities. where we found best practices, we have moved to make them common throughout our services. these initiatives are a product
of that process. in particular our collaboration with the senate and house armed services committee and other members of the senate and the house provides constructive direction. a number of these initiatives are also represented in the ongoing congressional efforts. these initiatives are part of a continuous, comprehensive campaign here it they are the latest effort in our drive to raise standards to empower commanders to protect items and to improve accountability. thank you, and i look forward to your questions. first, for the general, the secretary released a memo to top abouts talking command influence. i was wondering if you could talk about how big a problem you think [indiscernible] was and do you think this memo
offsets or effects undo command influence? [indiscernible] the secretary has spoken to [indiscernible] can you address whether or not the department thinks that canceling an exercise that has 2009 is any since motor grader at all, do you think, for the egyptian military? go toi could, i would your question for me first. as you know, the comments made by the president resulted in an impact in the cases that were and the judges involved. as a result, we believed it was necessary, the secretary did, to make a system -- a system -- a statement that they act independently based on merits of the case and to ensure that there is no taint in any of the
jurisdiction that takes place or the cases that are ongoing. as commanders we have a responsibility and we understood that and we know that. this is to act independently on the merits of the case and in short due process, both for justice, for the victim, and due process for the subject. as simple as that. the letter is clear and has gone out to everyone, and i expect -- i do not expect any issue. commanders will act independently in line with our justice system. let me try to get the question of the way. the bright star exercise as you heard from the president today was canceled this year. the secretary agreed with that decision. the secretary and the minister speak at -- spoke at length a while ago about this and other matters.
canceling this answer size was a prude -- canceling this exercise was a prudent step and a signal strong united states' objection to recent events, including violence against civilians, and we encourage the government of egypt to take measures to move toward a political transition that emphasizes inclusivity, emphasizes pre--- freedom of assembly, and to take steps to to exerciserom -- restraint from violence. we believe this was the right decision at this time. you saw the secretary's statement a short while ago about our desire to maintain a defense cooperation with the egyptian military, which we have enjoyed for some time. we are watching to see what happens next in that country. >> [indiscernible] exercise -- is
that a motivator for the egyptians to change their ways? >> canceling the exercise is a clear signal, we believe, to egyptian authorities that we are deeply concerned about recent events in the country. back tory to bring this the sexual assault initiatives that we are announcing today. i will take one or two more questions. >> [indiscernible] you mean the past several days? we have been calling around today trying to find out what specific aspects were going to go over for bright star, only a few weeks away? were thousands of troops heading over. it gives us the impression that may be [indiscernible] they have been saying it was
taking place and the decision was made yesterday -- and you heard the president announce it this morning -- to cancel the exercise. i would take exception with the notion that we had not been planning for bright star. >> [indiscernible] latercan try to follow up . we will focus on the sexual assault initiatives today, and maybe one more on egypt. call readouted a between the secretaries. it always said that the secretary urged not for the egyptian military to engage in a budget. yesterday was a massacre in cairo. did the secretary feel the minister was being straight with him? does he feel there is a loss of faith since the budget has occurred? does he feel there can be trust going forward with it military going forward after the
bloodshed? >> the united states is deeply concerned about the violence. the secretary believes maintaining an open line of communication with the minister for many reasons, to debate this government's views about recent events. these are egyptian government decisions. we expect contact to continue. onlytary hagel is not the official who has been in contact with its option authorities. secretary carry and others have also been in contact. we emphasize the need to move toward a peaceful political transition, to provide security in the country, and refrain from violence. i would expect contact to continue and for us to continue tourge egyptian authorities choose the right course for the egyptian people.
let's go back to the initiatives today. one more and then we will move on. >> [indiscernible] egypt and then on the topic du jour. >> members of congress are calling for a cutoff of the military aid to egypt. can you walk us through what you're actions are and if you can give consideration to turn off the spigot of aid? has sent in his written statement and the president has said earlier today number ofare a factors that have gone into our relationship with egypt. that is to be sure the military bishop and other factors about at the clinical and economic level. it is a collocated set of factors. i am not going to discuss what our internal deliberations may or may not be about at this stage. let's return to the topic of the
day. any other questions? >> i have a question about the topic of the day. this is a small factual question. trying to get a background of toretary hagel's directive report sexual assault investigations up the chain of command to the first general or admiral. did not secretary panetta do something similar, but said he had to report up to the 05 or 06 leve? -- level? did not the department or something like this a year or two ago? >> secretary panetta's directive was at the point of determined prosecution, it would be the special court-martial or convening authority which is a colonel in the army or a captain in the navy which it that action.
they took the decision to prosecute at a higher level. this requires across the this initiative raises oversight, in other words, reporting at a minimum to the first general officer in the chain. it ensures oversight at a higher general officer, flag officer rank. >> it has to reported to them, but they do not have to take action or prove anything? >> they will not necessarily take the concerning prosecution, etc. this is to ensure immediate oversight at an experienced level for the actions that take place from the point that we know of the report and beyond, to include at times later that will be determined that they may look at it in a holistic sense as a review to ensure that not only from the point of the report, but actions after it are appropriate. and in following our procedures. >> if i can just add to what the
general said, there are steps that the sexual assault coordinator and commander have to take, and those steps that an if someone is involved in unrestricted report, they need to indemnify -- identified the command for that investigation to take place. explained, as notification goes to the first general officer, that oversight will also ensure that the commands are following all of victimrect depth for the to make sure that they get medical treatment, to make sure that the military investigation command is contacted to start the investigation. that is one of the issues. >> was there a problem? >> no. in fact, what these initiatives really do, these are best practices that we have garnered from all of the services. and as the secretary reviewed the best
practices, he wanted to make these a common standard for all of the services. werelot of the services doing these initiatives, but he decided, because they were considered best practices, that he should make it a commonality across the services that all services will do these things. >> if i could, i could expand. one of the instances and was the initiative that requires a judge advocate to hold the article 32 investigation to see whether this would then be prosecuted. although not mandated in the past, many commanders, when i had a very complex crime, sexual assault, or a complex criminal issue, i would typically go to one of sja's to hold the article
32 because they have the background and could do it best with greater efficiency. we have had commander see that in the past. forelt that in this case sexual assault that it is a good common.ve to make, an >> you mention raising the oversight level to the general flag officer level. can you address the concerns of some of the victims who have lost trust in the military, that that may not be enough? raising the oversight level at the time when one of the most notorious cases, the burkett or general -- the brutal general jefferson sickler, can you understand why victims did not have trust in that military oversight? and sailor's note today there are 10 avenues for them to report, and they also know when they do report, it
goes immediately to a military in lawgation office enforcement and it is handled by them. they know that is outside the chain of command of their commanders in the unit they are written. there is a number of initiatives that have been taken to make sure that those who will have concerns, we have begun to take irtion so that ther procedures are outside the chain of command in terms of how we conduct the investigation and when we prosecute crimes. for instance, the victim actively seek program did they gives them a disciplined team with a lawyer that is an advocate for that victim. those are things we are doing to address some of the issues we trust. he have to attack that. increased, want unrestricted reporting. we can only get that if we get
more trust from our victims. i'm confident we are making a difference. if you look specifically in this focus, the energy of the chain of command, our servicemembers know we are serious about this. [indiscernible] some of these take place in the foreign country and local women are involved. do you inform those local countries, local jurisdictions, and how do they follow the rules? do they follow the u.s. roles or the local roles? with have agreements countries we are with that are specific to each country and the actin agreement with that specific set of rules. as a nation we represent our ideals. country.s of our
while we in georgia proper prosecution of our members, if that is appropriate in a given instance, we also follow those values and we let countries that we are dealing with no doubt instances that i think with each country it's a little bit different procedures for that. but we're america's services and we follow those ideals and that that's what our commanders would follow on the basis of what we do. >> [indiscernible] >> we ability in accordance with agreements with the country involved. >> one of your more persistent critics put out a note applauding to a point what you are doing. but this is not going to solve the problem. we heard from victims they don't trust the system enough
to report in a timely manner or at all. what's your response to your most persistent critic? >> first of all, we've been working with senator gillibrand and as we look at this, we're looking at every possible idea, practice that's out there to help us get after this problem. so we've been working very closely with her. we believe there is merit in many of the legislative issues and some of those out there, we're still considering and working with them. so we're going to look at this and frankly, if we believe that we can make a difference in this problem set, we'll look strongly at facting the other initiatives that perhaps aren't in this group here today. >> and our final question. >> there is a strong cor relation with the sexual assaults and abuse of alcohol. to what extent are you looking at taking more decisive
measures to ensure that all of these underage folks are not having access to alcohol which seems to be such an aggravating factor? is there any consideration to banning alcohol on bases? it's a workplace. >> i could speak on my experience what commanders are doing out there today and actions i've taken. you're right there is a very strong correlation between the use of alcohol and these crimes. and on many bases we've taken steps to limit alcohol in the barracks. to have our non-commissioned officers and officers enforce those standards in terms of the sale of alcohol on posts. and many posts we would have our 24 hour shop that could sell alcohol on post if they were open 24 hours. so when places closed down off post, troops would come on post to purchase alcohol.
many have gone to a restricted alcohol sale, some as early as 10:00 in the evening or restricted the amount you can buy. this is something we've looked at and the commanders have often taken steps individually to can you recollect this. >> my question was are you thinking about unifying that? you've fwon through with this initiative to call out the best practices but are you thinking of a best practices fwide lines for alcohol sales? >> what i just talked about has been stussed but at least in the meetings i've been in we've not discussed it in the form of making it a common across the services. we've left it to command at this point but we can take that on. >> thank you everyone for joining us today and we'll see you again here soon.
>> wrapping up this pentagon briefing defense secretary chuck hagel gave a statement on egypt today. his remarks came after a conversation with the defense minister today. he says in part -- >> as was mentioned president obama called for the cancellation of military exercises with egypt in light of the ongoing violence that has claimed at least 525 lives. live now to the john hopkins school of international studies on a discussion on the u.s. south korea agreement. this started about two minutes ago. >> he was the head of the
c.r.s. mineral section in the sciences and industry division fwr 1997 to 2,000 either and his recent reports include vanced nuclear power and nuclear waste disposal before joining c.r.s. he covered energy issues for four and a half years with the environmental conference. and so with that i'm going to turn it over to mark so we can keep going. [applause] > thank you.
it is delightful to see so many people here in the middle of august that aren't on vacation or watching the nationals. i'm pleased to participate in this very informative speaker series on the u.s. korea agreement. i'm glad to see so many experts here today who have been following this issue with me for the last several years and especially i want to thank my colleague mary beth for providing her expert review and guidance in preparing this presentation and we are both on korea team and interested in this process. so the issues related to the debate which we're going to talk about today are very complex as everybody here knows. and we certainly don't have the answers for all the questions about it yet so we are possibly
going to raise as many questions as we answer. hopefully this will put some useful information before this fwrupe today and provide a basis for a discussion that will help provide direction for further policy research because it doesn't look like this issue is going to be going away knit soon. -- anytime soon. we'll talk about the background and the current u.s. public of correia agreement. issues -- korea agreement. and then a little bit of speculation on the range of options for the longer term which should be interesting. but i need to say a little bit
about congressional research service where i'm coming from. it is a non-partisan office within the library of congress. we are part of the legislative branch of the federal government so we are federal employees but we are not under the president or the departments. our job is to provide objective authority dative and timely public policy information to congress. so that means especially the confidential part i cannot talk about any specific discussions we may have had with any particular congressional office was. and the last point it is important that c.r.s. does not advocate policy so we would not try to reach any policy conclusions that we would try to influence congress with. bottom line is i have to watch my words very carefully in
these controversial issues. why are we even talking about this? the nuclear cooperation agreements under section 123 of the atomic energy act of 1954 essentially allowed nuclear commerce or a prerequisite or a frame wok for a nuclear commerce between the united states and any other country and government to goment nuclear cooperation. so there is a few specifics that are very important. number one licensing of exports of nuclear material. direct u.s. foreign distribution. direct or indirect production. that means supplying of a nuclear reactor that may produce pla tone yum. and licensing of nuclear reactors and r.n.d. cooperation ll require 123 fwreaments.
the u.s. and south korea go back a long way, all the way back to the adams for peace program as a 3 crent stamp there. the first agreement was reached in 1956 and it really started decade of cooperation in commercial nuclear power and rnd that continues today. we're going to talk a little bit about the current rnd program that has its roots back to the beginning. the current agreement was signed in 1972 for 30 years and then that was extended to 41 years which brings us to a very important date. it expires march 19, 2014 and that's the deadline that everything is focused on right
now. let's put this whole debate in context. you think back to 1974 how much has changed since that time. from the south korean side they did not have any power reactors at the and they've gone now to 23, quite a change. they've become actually even competitive in the international market. the world market actually selling four reactors to the united arab emriots in a very world changing deal that occurred fairly recently. on the other hand, united tates has somewhat demin deminished in it's role in
nuclear markets. it was the only so-called freeway world splire at the time. now there is not really a freeway world and a communist world. it's all one world and there is a market that includes a lot of players and united states is not the biggest one by any means. u.s. designs were predominant throughout the world in 1973. that is not the case today although a lot of international designs are based on u.s. designs, they are not u.s. controlled anymore. and then the domestic growth. nuclear power industry was growing dramatically at the, not so now. and then things have changed in the atomic act itself since 1974 especially with the non-proliferation act of 1978, many new provisions were added that today's agreement does not comply with. so here are a couple of ill administrations of the changing
rld so we can see what i said. the blue line, the united states really reaching a peak in the 1980's and now plateauing. this does illustrate the relative sizes of the two programs, still quite different. south korea has taken its place among the top nike generating countries in the world. number four with japan producing very little. united states still much, much larger but certainly south korea is there among the top participants. for the future things may look a little different. here suddenly south korea and the united states are basically tied depending on what you consider to be a reactor under construction.
so i couldn'ted both unit for correction under construction giving us five, south korea with five, of course the big story here is the future, doesn't seem to belong to china and both the u.s. and south korean industries are interested in competitive issues involved with china's growth. so this basically sets the stage now for the environment that we're looking at that south korea certainly is now a major nuclear participant in the world and this does lay some of the context for the debate over a new agreement with the united states. o issues in the new agreement. of course we're here to talk about procedure, everybody's favorite. and this is very important when t comes to 123 agreements.
under section 1 3 a new nuclear cooperation agreement can take effect without congressional action but it has to meet certain provisions, certain criteria. one of them are the provisions of section 123 as it exists today and the other is it has to lie before congress for 90 days of continue wouse session. both of those are important in he current debate. using that 90 days of ntinuous session and the deadline of march 2014 that i discussed earlier when the current agreement expires, you can calculate that approximately spring of this year which has passed was the deadline to get a new agreement in place in order to have it take effect without congressional action. that is pretty much the deadline although there is not a firm deadline that everybody
pretty much agrees with that it has passed. so as a result there has been an agreement for a short-term extechs of the existing language which i'll talk about in a minute. if that hadn't happened there would have to be congressional action on a new agreement which would be very difficult. because of these issues primarily there are a lot of subjects that are covered in the agreement but these issues of uranium enrichment and spent fuel repossessing have been the primary issues that have been the subject of the debate for the last several years. and most of the subject of most of the diplomatic discussions. correia has been -- korea has been seeking indefinite
permission for a class of activities, in this case enriching uranium to higher evels of the fiss sill isotope u-235 so it can be used in light water reactors and the reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel taken out of reactors that is highly radio active and it can be separated into its components to pull out uranium that is produced during the reactor's operation to make new fuel. south korea believes this will address its spent nuclear or has argued that it will address its spent nuclear fuel storage problems which are fairly significant and also that these fuel cycle technologies would improve the competitiveness of
the careen technology in the world market. in other words they could sell readily. rs united states has not so far been willing to do that prime hi on nuclear non-proliferation grounds. and this is because enriched uranium not only can produce ewe rain i can't material for a nuclear power plant but if it continues to enrich the material to higher levels, that may be usable for nuclear weapons. and the pla tone yum cannot only be used for as reactor fuel but also used for nuclear weapons so it's a major non-proliferation concern. the arguments by the united states are that it would complicate effort by the united
states and the r.o.k. to eliminate nuclear weapons from careen peninsula and the diplomacy going on in that area this. would complicate the matter. on a broader perspective from the u.s. standpoint, the u.s. policy is to stop the spread and has been to stop the spread of these fuel cycle facilities to additional countries throughout the world. so the question becomes where o you draw the line? and the korea yans say we are a non-proliferation partner. you can draw the line after we get it. but from a u.s. perspective you see a precedent for every country that we grant permission to, there is another
one in line such as similar to what happened with japan. japan got this and now south korea is in lionel. so we have concern about this precedent issue. and we've seen and it's been stated again by the obama administration that nuclear non-proliferation is one of it highest priorities. because of this seeming stalemate or dead lock at least for now and the deadline passed r a new agreement on april 24, the u.s. and south korea did announce a two-year extension of the existing agreement as it now stand so the existing agreement would continue unchanged. this would certainly allow us time for more negotiations. it may allow time for the new park administration in south
korea to continue its review of spent fuel policy. and of course, it continues nuclear commerce between the two countries and avoids disruption that might occur otherwise. basically what's happened in e past with very temporary spruppingses of these agreements is that the export licenses are cancelled and causes quite a lot of disruption. the interesting thing about the is ce of two years and this the rnd that i mexed that has been going back for decade. currently there say ten-year joipt dud study by the u.s. and r.o.k. on the fuel cycle which includes the technologies that south korea is hoping to use for its reprocessing.
obviously in two years there is the result of the study will not be available and it's not clear how much the new agreement would be informed by that at this point. so the possibility of a possible short term extension are out there for that reason and others. so because this joint fuel cycle study is one of the maniactivities going on right now between the two countries i want to spend a little bit of time on it. plus there are some new twoments in this area that are interesting and potential show a little bit of where discussions may be going. so the joint fuel cycle study is intended to determine the economic technical feasibility and non-proliferation implications of oh processing and other spent nuclear fuel options.
and that is the technology that the south koreans are interested in pursuing. it's essentially a different technology which uses water based chemicals and produces a pure product. that's the technology used in the past for nuclear weapons programs. so it is essentially to dissolve or melt the spent fuel and moll ten assault and use an electrical current to separate it. that's the physician products which are the pieces of the uranium that have been split. and the proponents of pie row processing argue that you cannot have complete enough separation using this process to make a weapon but the level of separation and how important the would be and in making
technology proliferation resistent is certainly a major subject of debate. the study requires that the separations work involving special nuclear materials must be conducted at u.s. facilities and it began in april 2011. phase one is now finished. and according to announcement t confirmed the feasibility of the processing. this is in idaho. and there is a picture of the hot cells that are being used for this. so also new regarding the fuel cycle study is this nike technology transfer agreement that was just went into effect. it was published may 31 so that is vainl in the federal register.
and it was published and negotiated as a subsequent argument which is a provision under section 131. it was considered this study had enough non-proliferation implications that a special agreement was necessary. so the activities under the joint study are limited to rnd. both parties must agree before altering former content had is the standard language on basically separating uranium from spent fuel material. and both sides have to agree this is an interesting way to put it quote to review at an appropriate time the issue of consent to alteration in form or content to support continued research and development. so this is sort of looking forward down the road and seems to be somewhat open ended opening up many potential possibilities for what may be considered in these
discussions. and another interesting atement is that this technology transfer agreement may eventually be applicable to spent fuel in the rok that is subject to the u.s. r.o.k. 1 3 agreement. so it certainly seems to be anticipating the possibility of future activities along those lines. also interesting is that the transfer nuclear technology transfer agreement establishes a new review process for specific activities outside of existing processes. it excludes the reduction stage of the pie row processing system which is interesting minely because this is the converting of objection exide fuel which is the form the fuel to metal fuel so that the electrometallurgy cal process
will work. this is actually one of the tages or the main stage that the koreaians have been working on. they have actually built a reduction line at its facilities in south korea which i did visit in 2009 and visited again last month. it's still exactly the same. the united states has not allowed this to be operated. it's been a point of controversy because from the south korean per specive there is not any separation going on where the decision was timely made there is enough driving off of volatile physician products to make it count -- of course it's definitely an alteration in former content and the united states decided it's not comfortable with that.
it's a small capacity that operates in batches of one kilogram approximately. so the nuclear technology transfer agreement took effect july 25. this is pretty new. after at least a 15-day wait at which they did and is allowing phase two of the joint study to begin which could include more separations activities still all in the united states. phase two is supposed to take five years and evaluate five kilogram operations so they are moving farther toward commercialization potentially. and phase three is three years and that's the end of the ten years where they do the whole process. meanwhile, in correia aside rom the reduction facility
they built this which looks pretty impressive. i was there lost month and it is there. in 2009 they were showing basically dozens of tiny little crussables they had been veermenting with saying this will be our new facility. and they had a picture of this. last month when i went back this had been built so it's there. so it does tend to show that ability ns are serious moving forward with this technology. it's pride. processing dem administrations so there you have it. it is basically assimilated hot cell so it has remote manipulate tors and everything u have in a hot cell but
won't use special nuclear material, it will use simulated material. and when i was there most of the equipment was installed and they were bringing it in as we were there. so they are working hard on this and plan to start testing this october. the cost they told us was $30 million for the equipment which is fairly modest but that does not include the building and staff. so they are making a significant investment in this. they plan to start testing surrogate material during 2015, 2016 time frame. test are supposed to begin in 2017. so it coin sides with the joint study in the united states. the capacity is fairly significant. 50 kill grams per batch. this is all simulated material. no gama emit or thes. it's not in a hot cell so they
can't any real physician products in there. so what is congress doing about all of this? this is fairly high on the agenda because of the deadline but not pause it's controversial at this time. those issues have been sort of put off but there is this deadline. two year extension that is now before congress. the extension because it is identical to -- it is the existing agreement just extended is not compliant with the current version of the atomic energy act therefore will not automatically take effect. congress would have to enact it as a regular piece of legislation. and there was such a bill
introduced by house foreign affairs committee chairman of california co-sponsored by five members of both parties indicating that there is pretty wide support. it would authorize the president to extend the existing agreement through march 2016. the way it gets around the non-compliance is with language that simply says this can be done notwithstanding any other provision of law. that's why it has to be enacted though because it's congress overturning a previous provision of law. this obviously in continuation of the existing agreement does not have any advance consent in it so this makes it much less controversial from the u.s. side. esumably from the korea side
extensions may get more controversial because it's continuing the status quo they are not satisfied with. here is why a simpfide chart that we made that explains basically why does the existing agreement and the two-year extension not imply with the atam i can energy act and why wouldn't a new agreement -- what would have to be changed for a new agreement to comply also. so why can't we just extend the existing agreement indefinitely without these changes. without the notwithstanding language. in green we have some provisions -- the first column is in section 123 now, all the criteria has to be met. that indicates either they are met by the existing agreement
or met by other arrangements outside of the existing agreement which would indicate there wouldn't be any change of policy. it's already being done but not part of the agreement. you can see some of the safeguards peaceful use. he pink shows indicates that they need to be done but they are not in other arrange ms or they may not be in the existing agreement. hat's a couple of those. the retransfer provision although it's not in there but there has been no retransfer so it hasn't been a big issue. these are not necessarily controversial but they have to be dealt with. and there is more. another green one. physical security is done by separate agreement. prior approval for enrichment
is not in there. storage and transfer provision is not in there. then the final catch all, yellow for it's partially in there because applying all of these requirements to transferred technology is actually in the joint fuel cycle technology transfer agreement so it applies at least to that if nothing else. that's just to show that yes, there is a reason for all of these things. we wanted to get it down on paper for congress to see. so what's been happening? there was a hearing, two subcommittees had a joint hearing on the two-year extension and the administration has weighed in with support of early passage. so that was positive. the members noted the economic importance of this and there was not really any controversy over the two-year extension.
however, there were differing opinions on the substative questions, mainly reprocessing and enrichment which would be down the road. we have a couple of examples of tatements of that. without the benefits of domestic energy resources south korea depends almost entirely on imported energy with the exception of power generated by its nuclear power plants. give the r.o.k.'s growth it is unlikely the government can continue to provide enough low cost electricity to fuel it's economy. the ability to recycle nuclear fuel would ease this problem. that is why it is vitally important for the u.s. and south korea to complete negotiations on a modern 21st century nuclear agreement. >> there is one opinion.
>> and another opinion. his was all at that hearing. >> the united states and south korea have recently agreed on a two-year extension of our agreement rather than revising the agreement but both countries would like to see a long temple deal. like to enrich uranium and expand its nuclear power industry. i commend the administration for not agreing to advance consent rights for reprocessing fuel of u.s. origin. south korea wants a nuclear agreement that provides u.s. advanced consent for such reprocessing and that would carry deep proliferation concerns. >> so we see the range of congressional opinion. again, this is not really about the two-year extension. this is looking down the road
past the two-year or short-term extensions toward the hope for extension which presumably will tackle these ssues. for the two-year extension, there are expedited procedures in the atomic energy act. the administration did not invoke those perhaps because it was not considered to be controversial so passage as regular legislation will be necessary. there is no senate bill at this point. there might not be one. obviously the house could pass a bill. there are all kind of just the normal legislative process could go into play here. the house hearing and markup which was on july 24 showed very little controversial. the approval of the bill with other non-controversial bills
was by voice vote so it was moving along as anticipated. the -- anybody who follows congress does know however that until it's signed you never know. so even though this particular legislation may not be controversial you know know whether it might get caught up in unrelated activities or what may happen. so we have to watch it and see. maybe it will be included in a larger bill for example. we will have to watch and see what happens. we are certainly keeping an eye on that. certainly looking beyond the two-year extension and the goal being a longer term extension, whether or not two years is enough time to handle these issues obviously not known. but the obama administration
has scythed progress in coming to an agreed text. we don't know of any public details but that's what they are saying. we haven't seen any public move in the u.s. r.o.k. positions. but as i mentioned, the park administration does have a review under way of its spent fuel policies, so maybe that might have some implications for this. and of course the overriding importance as expressed during the hearings and debates about the u.s. south korea strategic aligns may also help set the stage for this. and since the two-year agreement was announced, there s the summit meeting between presidents park and obama in which they made these statements. they certainly seemed to
reiterate their existing positions to some degree, maybe show some possibility of movement but it's hard to tell. -- dent park, the correia or korea -- . >> so what are the ideas out there and i want to reiterate these are not our ideas. we do not propose or advance solutions for congress. we analyze the range of ideas that are out there so that congress has as much information at its dispose toll make an nfered decision. but there is a rake of ideas that have been floated around.
many in activities that have been taking place in the last three or four years know advance consent is one end of the range where consent would continue oh to be case by case. another short term agreement, maybe not the two years, but maybe something coinciding with the ten-year study has been suggested. such ideas such as advance consent with conditions. so one of the concerns that south korean side has expressed is that the lack of advanced consent is putting south korea s a lower status nuclear partner and the south korea status should be recognized. so this would recognize that status but -- south korea would not exercise those rights even though they've got them without certain conditions being met,
for example, certain mile stones on denuclearization for example. advanced consent for limited activities and one that has been noted of course is that south korea has been asking for is to operate its reduction facility. hat's the advanced condition pie ro processing. another is to build a fatty at some sort of u.s. controlled ite in south korea that may be the control would gradually be turned over over time. that's an idea floating around. and of course no agreement. what that might mean is not known. there has been some talk that 123 agreements is not necessary anymore because the united
states is not really producing tangible goods in the nuclear area. it's more of an engineering consulting role and maybe that might be something although that is i don't think being seriously considered. so that puts a lot of ideas out there that i hope will spark some discussion. so with that i will turn it over to the floor for further ideas. >> that was really excellent. i have a couple of questions
about the study itself, the ten-year study. om what you said, apparently the koreans are supposed to be carrier researchers at idaho. my understanding is they are not there anymore because they are not allowed to do anything. is that correct? >> when i asked who is there right now they said there is nobody there at the moment. i'm not sure what the back story is. the first phase was probably not that exciting as you saw the description of it. it was afeasibility of lab scale work. the second phase might be a little more interesting so maybe there will be a difference when the second phase goes in. i have not heard that. >> does anybody wish to weigh in? >> my understanding is part of it as you said was not exciting in the first phase because this
is proving what has been proven already. when do we get to something new in the study, is it the second phase? and also what -- you didn't discuss the other aspects of the study which are economic and non-proliferation aspects, those aren't technology things and don't require this technology transfer agreement necessarily but how is that governed and if they are not going to be able to do reduction work, what can they do? can they watch what is going on? >> i think that's the purpose of the technology transfer agreement is in fact to allow the koreans to take part. because even though it's actually to some degree korean technology is coming here and doing the work. so it's the interaction between the two is considered a technology transfer.
so this should allow them to actually be in the same room together and discuss the -- >> only the u.s. is able to do the reduction? >> i think it just has to be done in the united states. i'm not sure what the precise role of the actual scientists is. but it may be somewhat limited. there were only two at a time is my understanding is my understanding, four. we are asking around to try to get more details on what exactly is going on. we have not gotten too much yet. but those are excellent questions that we are trying to track down like what really is going on. we thought phase two is starting. that seemed significant. they are really going to do something. to hought is that not going be just in the united states but that's not the case because
the whole program is supposed to be in the united states. >> i have a comment and a question. the comment is 20, 25 years back actually ar gone national laboratories did have a processing plant and it was considered to be one of the proliferation resistent technologies in that time and we invested a lot of money. i don't know when it became politically incorrect to say it is a proliferation resistent technology. you play down on what the implications are if the senate doesn't pick up the bill and there is still a way out. >> i said they don't have to introduce their own bill but it could take up the house bill. that would be one scenario if it were added in the conference agreement, the senate may not vote specifically on it.
there are so many different scenarios that would occur as part of the regular legislative process so to speak but without the senate -- i'm not saying the senate is not going to act on a bill. i wanted to say it's more significant that the senate doesn't have a bill yet which it doesn't yet. no, sir the proliferation resistence, that is a huge debate so we cannot take a position on whether it is or is not because it's really a subject almost -- there's many many opinions and conclusions on both side of the degree of proliferation resistence, how much is the product of the processing usable probably in the directly as a weapon but how far does that get you down the road toward easily doing other chemical processing and things like that.
t's an area where c.r.s. cannot declare. it's too controversial at this point. but that was one of the main goals of the technology to follow on from the reactor tech program which was basically shut down partly by economics, partly by non-proliferation concern. and ar gone had this technology and said we'll pick this up and this will answer one of the concerns and they thought they were answering the economics as well. >> take you back to process issues, are you in a position to comment on the south korean process for approving a two-year extension? does it require formal government approval? >> we did look into that. i forgot what the answer was.
it didn't seem to be a problem. it seemed they can don: administratively. nobody has raised that as being a problem. whether they will want to continue in the future and make it more uncomfortable we don't know. >> nicely done. there seems to be increasing evidence that the global market for commercial nuclear power is going to embrace s.m.r.'s at some point and they will spread quickly in popularity and the koreans are a leader in this area it would seem. how do you see s.m.r.'s next to the 1 3 agreement. do you see them creating new issues, noish issues? par really? >> well at the back story walter and i both saw the
korean smart reactor work last month. and it was impressive. small mod lar reactors and that is certain been of great both political interest and industry interest as potentially a new way to get around the economics problem of nuclear power by building small modules that can be shipped into place and require less investment, etc. in the case of the korean reactor what would that mean as far as the 123 agreement, there is not any u.s. basis for that. i had heard and thought that it might have been part of the combustion engineering deal in the 1980's where the combustion engineering transferred all its technology to the koreans but there is not any evidence of
that other than the reactors look a lot alike. it's essentially korean technology and korean controlled. so we would not have any control over that, only to the extent they might go to u.s. suppliers and things like that. the united states has a number of s.m.r. designs that would be in international commerce. f we wanted to sell those to correia, that would -- korea, that would require the agreement obvious. >> when the two-year extension was announced, there seemed to be some discussion in congress about having a few selected changes to the existing agreement. has that idea been taken off the table? is there now universal agreement that the extent of the agreement exactly in its
current form is the first question. and the second, you talked about the possibility of multiple extensions. has there been discussion about how often you can do these two-year extensions without sort of frustrating the intent f the n.t.a. and essentially -- use a way to get around the requirements of the n.p.a. and has anyone raised that issue? >> as far as the changes to the short-term agreement, we haven't seen a senate bill yet. we have seen the house bill, it doesn't have it. we haven't seen a senate bill so basically that's all we can say about essential changes. obviously the easier way to do it, a cleaner way is not to try to change it but we don't know for sure. we haven't seen the bill. and then as far as the number of short-term agreement that is could be done, this is being done at least approximateth process right now is as a new
congressional legislation. so it doesn't really matter if it violates the spirit of the atomic energy act because that's just one other statute. congress can change statutes whenever it chooses. so that's what that notwithstanding language was. notwithstanding this meets all the criteria congress decides to don: any way. constitutionally congress could continue doing that, yes without any problem. may be a policy problem, they may be criticized for it but it ouldn't be unconstitutional. nybody else? >> just to go a little deeper on the disposition of spent co-korean peninsula.
leaving the spent fuel in correia -- korea the best option or could we modify it and come up with a real better solution to the spent fuel? >> you're talking about a multinational solution? >> yes. >> that is one of the ideas that is on the table. korea has a huge problem in citing waste facilities. it is densely populated and they have had quite a bit of trouble citing facilities in the past. so multinational and u.s. policy is that we encourage multinational ideas and that was part of what the program was all about, the global nuclear energy partnership. so theoretically it's on the table. i don't know of any specific
proposals. if it's multinational, it still has to be in somebody's country so what country would it be is always the question. >> [inaudible] . >> leave it in correia -- korea or take it to the united states in that got a lot of negative reaction. >> [inaudible] . >> that's a little different. it's a very small amount. it's like 20 tons. it's high enriched uranium so it's clear the connection between that and non-proliferation. it's hard tore sell the idea you're not just taking somebody else's waste and that's difficult. you're right, that is sort of the grail of non-proliferation. find a place that will take all of the waste and that would prevent the need for
reprocessing and solve people's waste problem. but where is that place? that's been the problem. >> what is the time horizon for congressional action on the there are nd whether in order to ensure that none of the licenses are affected or anything like that s the deadline the deadline of the expiration of the current agreement are is there any factors that would influence when congress would need to act in order to extend current agreement? >> we have one good example which was the expiration of the agreement in 1985 where congress didn't act in time. there was substative cons verse si but at that point it was
decided what was going to be done but it didn't happen. and evidently some of the export licenses did start to be cancelled or suspended by the nuclear regulatory commission. and evidently it didn't cause any real disruption because they were reinstated before real commerce started to be interrupted. what s hard to say at point how far over the deadline it would be affected. in north korea there is not as much nuclear exports to korea as europe. so presumably it would be less. so we don't know what the timing of these shipments would be. we don't know how long. but it is possible that that march 14 or whatever the deadline exact day s maybe not the exact day. you might be right. but i don't think anybody wants to really test that. but you don't know.
200 $50f trial courts, million of reductions in june judiciary budget has slowed court proceedings and put public safety at risk. judges say there are fewer officers to deal with record numbers of convicts who have been released from prison. the letter was sent to leaders in both parties in the house and senate. congress is not in session this month. who is, a town hall -- the future leader of your political party? be semantics, but how do we make women's issues icn's issues, democrat platform issues, independents'? it seems we are locked so much into partisan argument --
>> i would not be here if it were not for independent voters. in missouri it is about 1/3, 1/3 , and 1/3. there's a third of missouri who would not vote for me no matter what. and there is a third of missouri who would vote for me in the matter what. most of the folks in the middle are willing to vote for a republican or democrat. , likeey like compromise moderation. i think one of the things we need to do is make sure we are communicating always with independent voters across the country. if we always put on our hat of the nobel party first, we will lose those voters. he had an opportunity right now theuse the shiny objects in republican party do not translate well to independent voters. they translate well to the base
of the republican party, and you and i know this very well. your caucuses are famous for picking the republicans that are not anywhere near the middle. [laughter] really, that is an opportunity for us. if we continue to talk about issues that most americans care about, am i going to have a retirement him is their health care, is the bridge down the road safe, can i drive over it says, the macro , not macaroni and cheese issues she wants to talk about. even the macaroni and cheese issues we are focused on, as long as we keep talking about those, we will get more of those independent voters than steve king, ted cruz, and all the
todd akin wannabes. [applause] we will have more of that during tonight's town hall tonight. at up and coming politicians and average define new candidates. also your calls and tweets on the topic. tonight, live from 7:00 until 9:00 eastern. more coverage tomorrow, amy klobuchar will talk to democrats tomorrow. she is the keynote speaker ding event. she is the first democratic hopeful to visit iowa for a possible 2016 campaign. her live comments tomorrow at
7:00. >> what is interesting about washington is once you have that title, even if it is a short title, even if you have been term, youafter one can stay in washington as a former congressman, a former chief of staff to huntsman -- to congressman x or y. that is marketable. that is a departure from the days in which people would come to washington to serve, serve a little bit, and then go back to the farm, which is how the founders had intended. there is a new dynamic and a love it starts with money and the money available and resources available for people to do well here. >> sunday night, an insiders look on media and politics in washington, at 8:00 p.m. participated in a
town hall meeting to announce the california implementation of the health care law. >> good morning, everyone. good morning, everyone. thank you, chancellor, for your introduction. more importantly, for your extraordinary leadership. under your leadership, although things you described about ucsf are becoming a reality, following in the footsteps of chancellors, the first woman chancellor, a great leader, across the country. a physician, scientist, and a businesswoman, private, public, nonprofit, experienced. you bring a depth of experience to your latest role as the first then chancellor of ucsf, birthplace of the biotech
industry and the nation's crown jewel of biomedical research. that is how we see it. thank you for -- thanks to your itson, ucsf is voting on mission to advance health worldwide by molding future leaders in health sciences, education, discovery, and patient care. by providing high-quality care to community clinics, by conducting innovative research at institutions across the globe , and by partnering with health organizations like covered ucsf is advancing the health of californians across the state and the nation. thank you, chancellor. [applause] more than three years ago, president obama with a stroke of a pen made health care for all
americans a right, not a privilege. a reality. [applause] in doing so, president obama of ourthe vows founders, of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. life, a healthier life, liberty, the freedom per to -- the freedom to pursue each of our anappiness, or if you were artist, a cameraman, a writer of an individual, you could be self-employed. you could start your own business, you could change jobs. you could follow your own -- not your policy, policy, even if you had one. again, honoring the values of our founders, we go forward to make this a reality. it is a very important part of
why it was important for us to have comprehensive health care for all americans. here in california, already 8.1 million californians are now receiving preventative services. 435 young adults are now safely covered by their parents'plants. that is in our state. seniors have saved over $500 million in prescription drug medication, and soon the a woman in california will no longer be a pre-existing medical condition. [applause] morning we will hear from a very distinguished panel, and they will talk about the health care and how access in , covered california in particular. i want to acknowledge that i am glad to be here with the members
of the official family of san ,rancisco, senator mark leno tom will be joining us. nk any event, phil -- thaank you very much. the light is in my. who else is here? david campos, supervisor david campos? and who was the voice of god? dana howard, the voice of god. thank you, dana howard. we will be hearing from peter lee. herb schwartz, the regional director of the health and services representing the obama administration in our region. bagarcia.
to ben honor it is for me here with them because i know of their leadership and their work. of small and founder business majority -- without him it would be impossible to pass the affordable care act act. thank you for your tremendous work on that. [applause] and wendell, my senior health policy advisor resource to all members of congress, house and senate, and to the administration, on health policy. what does wendell think is what we say all the time about this issue. that is what we all find out. thank you, wendell, for being here. [applause] as america's first health inketplace, we take pride that, covered california is leading the way in establishing a bright and healthy future for the golden state by making sure
uninsured,s well as californians find plans that --t their needs and their that suit their needs and their pocketbooks. i say this plan is for you, because you can choose from so many plans. 13 comprehensive health plans here. that has established a marketplace has already announced premium rates that are lower than expected, and california has led the way. the disparities issue is a major, ethnic, racial, whatever disparities have been in terms of incidents of disease susceptibility, not being in the health care loop enough, and it is an issue in which california
has led the way because we are blessed with such diverse the. the healthcare marketplace opens on october 1. californians will finally have access to affordable quality care they deserve. i am so pleased to see so many of you here from a cross- section, from labor, community service organizations, the public and private nonprofit sector, thank you all for being here. the chairman of the san francisco labor council is with us. thank you so much. [applause] of covered california is peter lee, and i want to make sure we have a pool appreciation of peter lee. from leading the center for healthcare rights to establishing the obama administration's new center for medicaid and medical innovation, mr. li has dedicated more than 25 years to reducing costs and
our healthare in care system. with his hard work, with the staff of covered california, a strong and healthy life that was unattainable for so many will soon be an unalienable right for every californian. as we approach the open aromas season, -- as we approach the open enrollment season, we will sure he will revive an example .f the affordable care act thank you for delivering affordable quality care to our state. leisure now to introduce peter lee. [applause] we would not be here today but for the leadership of leader nancy pelosi.
[applause] i also want very much to join the leader in appreciating the --ncellor and the university excuse me -- u.c. san francisco. i am tainted by another school in southern california. excuse me for that. oft may do a letter bit orientation, and i hate to correct the voice of god, dana, chai will, which is fill out those questioned forms. i guarantee we will not get to them today. andompleting those forms putting in an e-mail that you have a question that you have, we will contact you and you will be part of making history. the questions you ask are questions that hundreds of other
californians have. by your asking us, the have our chain, we have hundreds of staff, that will be answering your questions and answered questions millions of californians between now and when open enrollment closes at the end of march. we are making history. many --l will be asking answering many of those questions. fill out those cards, we will collect them, and answer many of them today. what we will do is i will spend you tohour to orient wear covered california is, in the process, what it means to have affordable care, outreach him a and then we will have 20 minutes of questions and answers with the panel, myself, and the distinguished panel you heard elosi.ither p then we will hear remarks from leaders in california who have
made sure that health care is a right. senator mark leno, and others, will do remarks to close and wrap up for this morning. that is what we are going to run through. a brief momentth of audience participation, and i will ask you to raise your hand if you have health care coverage through your employer or through medicare. but your head up, please. you look around and i could do a quick scan. that is about 86% of you who raised your hand. [laughter] that is about the national average. what does the affordable care act before you? the president said it up but it is important to note you keep your coverage. the expansion is for people in an individual margaret who are uninsured, but you keep your coverage, but all of a sudden you know that if you leave your job it does not mean you are leaving the world of health insurance. you have a guarantee you can
always get insurance. you do not need to live in fair of being a job away from health insurance. good deal. saw, 14% of you that i what does that mean for you? this is where history is happening him january 1 where coverage will now be available for 35 million americans, about 5 million californians. let's talk about affordable coverage being on the way and why californians do not have coverage. big reasons we have many people in the state that do not have health care coverage. we have been doing focus groups, sitting down with thousands of californians to talk about this. they have a pre-existing condition, and the current health care system says unhealthily, we do not want you. reason, your employer
does not offer it. offer% of our employers coverage, and many small business offer coverage. notcore reason people do have coverage is it is not affordable. those of you that raised your hand get a leg up from your employer that helps pay the presentations -- the premiums. you would not be able to have it without the leg up. the affordable care gives that leg up, based on people's income, to all americans. it says we want to get everyone giveed him a he want to everyone a level playing field to have health care coverage. the leader talked about some of the advantages in place in the affordable care act. let me talk about the improvements that are coming down the track. first, guaranteed coverage. this means that you cannot be denied the cause of your health status. limits, it is
changing the world of health insurance. colleaguesnds and and i know in many ways the health insurance is this has historically been about how to avoid sick people him because that is how to make money if they do not have deliver care. we are changing that with the isordable care act which you have to take everyone. if a plan thinks they will win people.ing sick they are wrong. ringing in people with cancer. we are changing the rules of the game. there are new rules. large employers us offer coverage or pay a penalty. the penalties will kick in in 2015. there are new obligations for individuals. individuals forget that leg up to help them buy coverage and
there will be an obligation for them to pay a penalty if they do not. a very small penalty. have spoken to thousands of californians who say i have heard about the penalty. they say i care about you making healthcare affordable. this part of giving everyone in the game. what is this right? one of the things that at does is define -- and this is nationally -- essential health benefits. these are the benefits that instead of wondering if they are covered by your health plan, you will know every health plan is covering maternity care, prescription drugs, labs, preventive care, and included in that preventive care is a preventative visit that costs you nothing. this is not just in covered california. this is in all markets. we are changing the world to benefit all americans. let's talk about who is eligible. it is legal california residents
who are not eligible for subsidies and undocumented immigrants and those recently incarcerated. it is important to note this. californians have a history of commitment to making sure everyone who lives in the state can't have access to care. the affordable care act is making healthcare a right for americans. thatso want to make sure we are making sure that everyone who lives in this state gets access to care. we will need to support the safety net, community health clinics, hospitals, and there still will be people who do not have insurance. the act takes us a long way. who are weak, and who is this covered california thing question mark i like to say we are public, but we are dot-com. we will be out there marketing all the the place to provide new information and the one-stop place that californians can go arefind out if they a
eligible for medical, or for a place to shop for place that has the back, has choices they can make that are balanced, fairly resented, that they can get as good a deal through covered california. alfred was the first date after the passage of the federal care act is a week in california will set up an exchange, now called covered california. one california to set up a way that is anchored in the diversity, red, size of california. many other states have not done that. there are 16 states across the nation that will be state-based exchanges. every one of those, and there are 35 states watching what we do, watching what oregon does.
how does the state-based thing weren't question mark we are sure we will do it right and better because we are from men of the state. we are over seen by a five- member board, and they are not in the room right now so i can pander to them, and it is a great board. they know healthcare, that diverse immunities of the state, have one job, which is to make sure 5 million californians it access to coverage. you can get a sense of them by their vision and mission statement as they frame it. start with a vision statement which says all californians get access to care. that is not an insurance vision. it is appropriate to be here which is a healthcare provider. it is about people getting the right care at the right time for the right provider. our mission is to increase the
number of insured californians wary our vision is to lower health care costs while increasing quality. our vision is to address health severities been anchored in giving consumers the ability to remake the right choice. we are a tool for consumers and that is what drives us. what do we offer? and webout portability, are the one place people can find out whether they are ells cal.orm medi- also defined if they get premium assistance to lower their costs. you will find through covered california benefit design that is designed so your copayments is not a deterrent to care, it is rather a standard benefit designed so you will not have the gimmicks of insurance.
you will have designs that do not get into the way of getting care when you need it. many plants,es for free preventive care, and lower out-of-pocket maximum is. there are three things that are key. affordable products, are kidding to let people know the news and facts about what is available, and then and rome at. dana spoke about the need to get people in enrollment. we have 12 plans available, but they will be different in each area. in san francisco, the plants will be anthem, blue shield, kaiser, and others, as well as medi-cal. different plants in los angeles and san diego. -- the importance is it is the largest nonprofit, but
not just statewide plants. we reached out to recognize that health care is local. we wanted plans that are anchored in the communities they serve. sanre so excited in francisco to have a chinese community insurance plan. we are excited in sacramento of western health advantage. across the bay in alameda, the alameda alliance. we have plans with deep serving low- income people's. and you come to covered california, you will find what your options are they somewhere you live. six plantsoffering in providing services to small businesses. we will set up a shop. i will note that i worked in washington. i ceased to not speak in -- i
to not speak in acronyms. we speak in seventh grade he was or below or spanish or cantonese, and we speak clearly. the small business health options program is a new program for small as this. the world is changing in a huge way for individuals. subsidies are large. for small business, right now small businesses are struggling with offering care. there are no penalties in place in the future of small business. we want them to continue to offer care, and they will be able to offer choice. they will say i have picked covered california. that my employee the whatever plans available to them. many of small businesses will be able to get a tax credit to lower their costs.
not government insurance. we are not government doctors, hospitals, pharmacies. we are not death panels. we are not raising everyone's insurance costs. the discussions in washington and that being political footballs about pundits, etc., and what we are moving to in california is facts. talking about what the real benefits are, what it means in premiums, affordability, and getting out at information. a way fromget out the theologies to that. that is what we will do now as we go forward. let's talk about milestones and timelines. many elements of the affordable care act are already in place. the leader noted we have hundreds of thousands of kids under 26 who have coverage today because of the affordable care act. nationally, 3 million americans
have also because of that element alone. the big deal in terms of changing coverage eggs effect january 1, 2014. that is a red letter day. that is the day as big as 50 years ago when america said our seniors should have a right to health care, and we launched medicare and at the same time said poor low income americans medicare.ht to january 1 is when we say that right should be there for all americans. it is a huge day. we will be starting and we have already started community outreach, we will do our getting coming up in september come then in october, and there is an open and rome at. enrollment. rome we will be educating
californians that that open enrollment time is critical. it is during that time when a health plan can say i do not care what your health status is. guaranteed. we need to educate people that if they say i hear i will get coverage whenever i want, maybe i will wait until i get hit by that truck. you not wait. sign up in open enrollment. if you say in june i decided i would wait it out, you will not get your coverage. you will get another chance asked fall in october of 2014. they're setting up a system that is a new system that we will all become very familiar with. at stock about what it will take to make it work. affordability. there are two things that go into affordability. first is what you pay for premiums and the second is what you pay for out-of-pocket. that is what you pay when you see a doctor. both elements have critical
act to makee health care affordable. first, premium assistance. if you are a californian that $16,000,s than about you will be eligible for medi-cal. one of the thing that the leadership did with governor brown is to say we are going to cal to take- advantage of the affordable care act. about 1.5 million more californians will be newly as oval. -- newly eligible. what does this mean? how much assistance you get depends on how much money you make. if you make $16,000 a year, you will have all of your premium paid. 50,000 dollars a
year, you will get a leg up, not the same size, but you will get a financial leg out. $50,000 as anthan individual, you will get the leg up of knowing you are buying a plan that is covering essential benefits, you cannot be denied or taken from you. everyone benefits. everyone is in the pool. but the premium assistance is targeted by income. what does it say about affordability? you will become familiar with a whichcept, metal tiers, define how rich is the health insurance you have. a bronze, silver, gold, platinum. yourver land means insurance will cover 70% of your cost, and the balance is your deductible, your out-of-pocket. for a richers more
plan. if you want to health insurance plan to cover virtually everything and you spend very little, your premium will be more. if you want to take more risk ,d spend less on premiums you can pick up bronze plan. this is giving information to make choices. concrete about this talk about the different plans that will be available for individuals in terms of benefit design. there are a lot of numbers, and all these slides are available at our website. a lot of numbers here. a couple things imports. or details on the website. today, if you search for health plan, san francisco, you can find 75 health plans that cost tom at my age from $200
$1000. when you cannot tell is what they really cover. it is hard to figure out these rules of insurance for copayment. what we are having is standard benefit design. when you decide in san francisco ,o pick between different plans you're picking the plants because they got the doctors you want, not because they are playing with the roles of the benefit design. what does that mean. if you are at the silver level, $45. you're not by the gimmicks of what it is going to cost. for that silver plan, maximum out-of-pocket, ticks thousand dollars. -- $6,000. it is a lot of money. healthcare is expensive. if you have something that sends you to the hospital in this state, you could have bills that are hundreds of thousands of
dollars. health care expense is the number one reason that individuals have personal bankruptcy. with the affordable care act, the maximum, someone without a subsidy will spend is $6,300. let's talk about the financial support for lower income californians. he had a sliding scale benefit that reduces that for lower in come californians. we know if you make $20,000 a year and you say $45 for an office visit versus making sure i pay my rent, maybe i will not go. what we have is designed for that person who makes $20,000 or $17,000, their premium could be as low as $19. the rest will be that premium assistance. it is tiered based on income. it means going to the doctor. you make $17,000 a year, your primary visit is three dollars. that is a bus ride. benefit designs.igne
having benefits that are not gimmicks that are clear, standardize, that help he will get care. how will the rate speed ba sed? based on your age, zip code, your family size come and what plan you select. you pick the level of benefits and you will see what your rates are. what will rates not be based on? not on your gender, health status, under pre-existing conditions, on tobacco use. this will say rate you will see out of the gate. let's get concrete and talk about jose. a hypothetical jose, makes $31,000.
next slide,plan, $83 a month from the federal government and the irs to help him by the plan he chooses. 186 at the chinese health plan. he could also say i do not want a silver plan. i want a bronze plan. have more risk. he can apply the $83 to his brawn plants that will cost them $100 a month. we will educate people what their choices are. let's do another example. the taylor family. this is a couple with two kids. they make $58,000 a year. not a poor family, but they are still making ends meet. this is not easy living, with
all due respect to san francisco. i know this. [laughter] $58,000, two kids, john andrea. what is their circumstance? premiumium of what the cost would be, $1000. they would get almost $700 in assistance to help them by their coverage. -- buy their coverage. that is a big leg up. they still have responsibility .f spending up to $500 a month they could also take a bronze plan that means their monthly premium would be as little as $150 a month. that premium assistance stays at the amount that they can use wherever they want. plan.ld buy a richer this is about choice to help them make the right choice. we have affordable plans. we have tools to help them be a affordable. the next thing we need to do is
educate people, to get out the misconceptions, to talk facts. we will do a huge amount of outreach to maximize enrollment. we will reach out to all californians and we will reach about 6 million californians eligible for subsidies, 2.5 million eligible for subsidies, but also we want everyone to have insurance. 2.7 million californians will be eligible for subsidies. they can shop in the individual market. we do not care where. get in short. the motto of getting coverage is what we will all be about. when we think about doing outreach, california is a very big state. in the bay area, there are about 400,000 subsidy-eligible individuals. san francisco has been a leader
for providing expanded coverage. we are excited about the work the mayor is doing to convert able already in healthy san francisco into other plants. there is huge potential. you look at the state of california and you look at many counties alone and you look at counties like alameda, riverside county, on hundred 80,000 eligible people. that is more eligible people than in the state of utah. you look at how many eligible in san bernardino. that is more than that is a little than three or four other states combined. we are a big state. it is important to understand that diversity of our state. the 2.6 million californians that will be eligible for subsidies. half of them are latino. out of the door is translated into 13 languages. besides speaking to the latino community, asian-
pacific islanders represent 380,000 of our eligible people. that means our material must be in those languages, and particular chinese, mandarin, cantonese, and we are looking at building over time -- this is where our lot at stage one we will put welding on that ash he anted our entire website in chinese. andre building materials strategies to reach out. october bigoing in marketing. you will see us on tv, on the radio. you will read us in community newspapers. farsi, in local papers. will not see us in the super bowl. you will see us if you watch a univision. on
that is where you will see us. beyond doing advertising, we are reaching out in the grassroots up come from community groups. we want to talk to people from where they live, work, shop, play, and pray. he have a network that is anchored in advocacy, community health centers, chambers of commerce, that we are starting today. we have trained thousands of to do outreach, to talk about issues, to talk about getting people in short, talking about the facts of coverage. this network has over 250 organizations. legal center,ic san francisco human services network, some in this area, and these are a starting point. it is a good mix, but it is a top we need to me\/ --
build on so they are not just hearing about it from newspapers, they are talking about it in schools, to their neighbors about it in a way that is informed, educated. we will expand that. we will establish a community network. this will have partners and we need partners across the state. one of the things i have been so thrilled about coming back to california after a stint in washington is throughout hell throughout is california, doctors, nurses, health plans, the tumor advocates said let's do this thing right. that's implement the act of making work. it will be a partnership opportunity to work with covered california to get the information out to get all californians insured. the network role have organizations like clinics and
.ospitals i have been in these groups with young people. they are called the young invincibles. they are looking for these options. we need to reach out to people whose first language is not english. in the to reach out world communities and we will do that through our community outreach network. we have a link to that on our website. we need to get to our questions. we have affordable products. we have done marketing. then we need to enroll people. this is one of my true confession moments. i said we will build this website, it will be as easy as buying a book on amazon. confusing stuff. healthcare is confusing. it will be easier than doing
your taxes on turbo tax. that means we will have a website where people can go through their choices, take their choices, but what it means is we need human beings, sitting down across the table from people going through questions. of the initial enrollment will be talking to someone about their questions, not online. the online system will be great. this is confusing stuff. what does this mean question mark we will have a service center with people trained in the service center to cancel -- to answer peoples questions and they will speak a does the language. we will be able to respond to them. we will have across the state insurance agents, certified, to help people and roll. we will have certified and -- ed it -- and rolled it enrollment counselors.
it is making the right choice available for each individual, giving them the choice to make the right choice for them. we know it will take people touching people to talk about these issues. i am excited we will have a dozen organizations in san francisco that have said we will help people and role. we will be working with hundreds of organizations across the state to help people and role -- enrooll. -- enroll. enrollment.n it is not over then. after march 31, people can still enroll if they lose their jobs. open year-round.
we are part of the new system. how do we help people anenroll? we will have new tools for consumers to see what their are, what options are available that they might pick. he have today available representatives, people who can answer questions. 8:00y through friday, until 6:00, we will be open saturday in october. having people in the field, and one of the main tools we will have is the little mapping function. i want to find somebody who speaks enter in close to me. -- someone who speaks mandarin close to me. we will see who speaks the
language and their hours of opportuniteration. we already have thousands of certified agents say we want to make this thing work. we want to be part of the all hands on deck. we are excited about where we are. we have hundreds of questions here. we will now go to questions with and i guarantee we will not answer them all. he will try to answer as many as we can. we will get back to you. part of making history. as the president said, there will be ups in the wrong. the perfect thing is we as a country have said health is a right. where down the path like 50 years ago when we said we will not stand by and have seniors not have health care. that was a big deal.
today we say of course we have medicare, the right thing. we are on a path now saying all americans have a right to health care. with all of you, with the broad leadership throughout california, we are confident when we look back now there will be a day when we say americans did not have a right to healthcare, what was that about? yourk forward to questions. thank you very much for helping us make history. you heard we have a great panel. came forof questions some of the panel. covered california has great staff. a great team of people. our success is about this being a california wide effort.
it is about working with organizations across the state, working with ethnic organizations. i will ask the questioners to stand up, and they can do follow-ups. folks will hate this come about tryave one rule -- do not to take the mic. we will hold onto it. we have seen people taking the mic and not letting go. kate, are you here? if you are shy, the ready to have a follow-up question. this is from barbara rcm. what is going to happen to healthy san francisco? about 60 years ago san francisco created a universal program for uninsured. today we have 60,000
individuals. 40,000 will be eligible for medi-cal. 20,000 will continue to be in healthy san francisco. they will have health access. whoof our messages to those qualify for covered california is that is better than healthy san francisco because it is full insurance, has more benefits than an access program. up, transition. how would we transition for what is better? >> we are working with many of who areents, consumers, already part of this. in the state have a program that is a fast track to medi-cal. we have 10,000 individuals who are moving in that direction. who will0 locations
work with everyone who qualifies for that eligibility to transition. covered california, which i want them to know, we will be working with them hand in hand and with all of those who qualify for that service. and thanks to the leadership of san francisco. it has been incredible. san francisco has been a leader, but many other counties have low income health programs. we are working on the same issue. have issues statewide. we make sure if they go into private lands they have continuity of care. issues of transition are san francisco issues, but we are looking to do this in partnership with others. susan?ang -- stage right. to of the plans with regard
outrage, the chinese small business and workers, and when -- i willgoing to be do a follow-up question which relates to voter registration. you address the question. >> i want to do a shout out to peter and his team. they took on an unbelievable task in front of them. they have done a tremendous job. you cannot imagine putting all this together, the technology, working with all the groups like ours. many congratulations. for small business, we are working with every possible ethics chamber, community group, and we have spanish language
capability on our team. we have a materials in all languages. ethnicworking with the chambers and groups out there. that is our model to partner with business organizations drought the state, to make sure informationthe directly to every community of color. we will be doing a lot of outreach in multiple languages targeting print in languages that are culturally specific to areas. i will ask a second question. when our pre-populated voter regs be available all? there is something called the motor voter law. callow for you -- california has been identified as a point where we are required to provide voter
registration information after enrollment. we'll come up with a plan on how we can phase that in. they're making registration material available. what is going to get better over time? our job is to get people and nrolled in coverage. also getting better at doing that as we meet the law going forward. about the small business when thati wonder will be available for small business, when the plants will be available for small business? >> what the plans are and which counties they are serving is available today. you can go to our website and see the plans available, and what the rates are and how they compare to the market. and when yourates can buy will be october 1. for the small business options
program, like individual markets, for coverage starting january 1. the full information, and that will be with the asian community, the small business health insurance is sold through licensed agents. that will be as of october 1. thank you. a question for herb schultz. will covered california offered -eligible for income groups after they turn 65 and are thus not eligible for medi- cal without resource limit? egan?is makga megan. herb, can you handle that? >> yes. peter and i have known each other since we were 24 and 22 in washington when i have a lot of hair and his was darker. [laughter]
i want to take one moment and say if we look back, we are 53 days to history. national women's political caucus, i was a senior in college, and i got the opportunity to find out what san francisco already knew, and that is the first time i met leader nancy pelosi. i found out then what you have already known, and from working for a president and working for a secretary and working with a isder like nancy pelosi, she not a historical figure because we got health care reform assuring thate is every resource of the federal government is being brought to bear for local implementation. i want to acknowledge that leadership, cause it is in this region about state, local, tribal, and territorial implementation. ands one thing to stand up
pass it, but with our leaders here, you have set the example that we have to continue to press to make sure everybody that needs healthcare, they have a right to get it, and that they get it. thank you again to you. two quick things. not everybody is able to get on medicare. some of our immigrants that have come over that have not been in the system that are not able yet and thereo there, are ways to be able to come into covered california even if you are post-65, if you're not eligible for the medicare program. we can talk about the details of how that is particularly none. but, yes. >> follow-up? do not try to take that mike. >> i am sorry. i wanted. my concern was about the magi eligible group, mark the medi- cal expansion group, not seniors
or people with disabilities, but they are eligible for medi-cal about any acid test until they hit 60 five. once they hit 65, they are no longer eligible for medi-cal. go intoss they want to another medi-cal program that has an asset limit, a low asset limit. i am wondering for that group, then they might be eligible for covered california, but will there be any additional assistance for them? >> he could talk you about the medicare side of that, and what that tool eligible program will bring a about the medicare side of that, and how this will not be a marketplace issue. i want to make sure from the federal perspective that we can answer all the questions for you. i mentioned the leader has insured that federally, we are bringing the resources.
are of the organizations not health and human services organizations, they are nonprofit and religious organizations. they have different types of organizations that are very important. we are working very hard to work with housing and urban development. we are working with you to make sure that all of our federal assistance programs are providing information about california. >> it is easy and right to get very quickly. people talk about averages. there are very specific questions about what you are eligible for.
to get into very specific questions we will train people in each part of california. medicare and how to put these together. we need to walk through these issues. start getting answers ahead of time. to make the right choice for you. >> and medicare and medicaid services, i give the e-mail and my cell phone. working with covered california, what was that? not until january 11. capability casework with 500 people here. this is -- @hhs.gov;
email@example.com, 415- 7049. we may not have all of the answers but we have experts as well as covered california and all of our colleagues appear. i hope you will use this and let -- 24-7,24 -- seven how to help. a number of folks in congress and the white house, have the affordable health care act. two is exempt here. >> i also want to give a shout out to peter lee. had the privilege of watching other states implement, relative to a lot of other states, is the
cadillac. peter does not like that term. shapee in much better than we are. question,f the federal employees are employed by a large employer. they will retain their coverage to the federal health benefits program. which is like a large exchange. you could say to some extent that the affordable care act -- insurers and contractors -- federal employees get a fixed amount of money, to a large extent, and shop on the exchange. there is one exception to that. congressional employees have to enter the exchange. and theof congress to go intoaff have
the exchange like ordinary americans, and because of a law,g that follows the will retain the congressional employees and their employer contributions and they will shop on the exchange where they reside. in some ways they were singled out and treated differently than other employees of large companies. that just theted federal employees and members of congress will enter the exchange. >> i was hoping to see some leadership by example. the leaders would be the first one to sign up for this? >> they will be.
members of congress and the congressional staff, they will have the planned choices, the range of options to all californians. this is a state that leads by example. right now the federal employees have a lot of options. what we are doing is saying that all -- all americans have a lot of options. other move to a couple of questions and then moved to outreach. we have about 15 minutes and we won't get to all of the questions. mitsy? exchanges think the will affect the overall cost of providing health care. i will take a crack at this. this is a very important question. of the gate, what they are
doing is making healthcare available, but part of this is getting everyone insured and saying we have to get our arms around health care costs. health care costs more in the united states than anywhere else. part of what we had for the last 20 years is the shell game of saying, it is not my fault. we have many efforts in california and nationally to see how we deliver care. withof the contracts covered california -- we require them to say, what are you doing that people with cancer are getting the right care every time. you doing to make sure that primary care -- is not a myth, this is developed. delivering care through group care -- group care.
one thing we are doing is have the plans show how they are part of changing delivery, and how we are working with medicare, working with medicaid so the entire delivery system improves over time. is made up ofce health care costs. one of the important advances of the affordable care act is to make sure that the majority of the money we have is spent on healthcare dollars. to get you into the details in the weeds -- that what you spend on premiums is being spent on doctors and nurses and hospitals. we have to make sure people are getting the right care at the right time. >> what the affordable health care act did is organized the individual market. andle will be able to vote you will know the price of those different health plans and those
charts that he put up, there were a lot of differences among the plans the californians can select from. nationally, health care costs have grown for the last three years at the slowest rate in the last 50 years. medicare rates and premiums have gone up very slowly compared to the historical average. they have lower the projections of medicare and medicaid by over one dollars trillion -- by over one dollars trillion -- why over $1 trillion, to show that some of this is through the recession, but part of this is the healthcare field, and the signal that the affordable health care act is sending. >> in all of the exchanges
across the country we see the rates come in, both individual with the small business exchange. they came in way lower. this has stabilized across the country. >> for the last three and a half the rest of the world to cornet health care. >> san franciscans because of the healthcare access have more -- ss to emergency rooms,
>> thank you very much. pamela navona. right up front. what about dental insurance coverage? this is very important. covering dental for kids, pediatric dental and pediatric vision. they don't cover necessarily. adult dental is not part of the standard practice. on inl be adding those terms of the supplemental offer. we want to enable people to buy that.
we will be adding in the dental options. we have six dental providers with what we are offering, with dental premiums for kids as low as $10 per month and we will try to get every child in rolled in health and dental coverage. >> thank you very much. we have another six minutes and 832 questions. we will have some closing some on the cost and quality and a couple of questions we have is on outreach. -- can other people stand from three or four people saying, how does a community --
based organization become an enrollment site? says, i have 100 people who want to volunteer, they want more information. what can we do to be part of this. questions, onee thing that is so comforting is we have such an outpouring of interest from people who know this is part of making history and they want to be part of it. andting in august september. we will be doing training throughout 2014. we have any organization that wants to be certified in enrollment, step up and we will train your people and we will not only train your people but we will pay them. counselors,rollment
covered california will pay them $58 for everyone they helped to enroll. licensed insurance agents. they need to be certified to make sure they understand the rules. know as much don't about medi-cal as the private market. but they know a lot. we will have regular information about the timing. not everyone will say that they want to learn everything. we will have a webinar, just to get a quick version of what you saw today. for any level of interest. no matter how much you want to roll up your sleeves. >> for all of us, friends and relatives and neighbors across the country, one of the biggest
pieces of information is if you don't have covered california, the people across the united states don't have access to the marketplace. 50 marketplaces will open on october 1. tell your friends and relatives that everyone can get the kinds of benefits we are talking about all across the country regardless of whether the federal government facilitates the market or we have an awesome organization like covered california. >> i appreciate that tip of the hat to what we are doing in california. this is an exciting partnership but i had the opportunity to work with leaders in more than one dozen states, like oregon. like washington. like colorado. they are doing great work. this is also a marketplace available to every single
american. there are certain things we are doing that is a little bit different. standard benefit design is something we are it -- something that california is doing. we sat down and we were not picky about the health plans. said california should be an active purchaser. every single american now has the right to health care coverage. with that, i actually want to make sure that we stay close to on time. we will have responses to all these questions. we will send you an e-mail response, in the next couple of weeks. in doing that you are part of making history. forre we turn to
individuals to do closing remarks. that -- i would like to have the leader say a couple of remarks. >> peter, as you have said over and over, this is local and state and national. i want to acknowledge those officials who are here. we have heard from -- things,ll of these every good thing have a with moree history, successes ahead. i want to thank garcia and mayor lead. -- mayor lee for making san francisco a leader in respecting this as a right to all people. want to come back to where we are.
this is a question about cost. this is an important cost of healthcare, the cost of the insurance premium. if there was no other reason to pass the affordable hair -- affordable health act. the reason we would have had to do this is because of cost. family, individuals and competitive business internationally, local and federal and state government. the rate of increase has dramatically turned this way. one of the other points that was made, and i want to emphasize this, the law is about quality, of service, not quantity of procedures.
this is about performance and not procedures. this is about value and not volume. you see an example of san francisco, where performances like this and compensation is like that. country,arts of the compensation is like that and performances like this. if you are not getting the proper care, and free admissions to hospitals, and you are not sent home with the right that they have the qualityad on, of life for the person is not healthy, and the cost to that person and the community, every aspect of the delivery of service. competitionustry, lowers cost.
competition lowers cost. up until now, the health- insurance industry. -- iave this facility here need that. this will be a way to have competition that really reduces costs. this is really a very important part of it, as it makes us healthier. not just to have health care but prevention and wellness, the prevention and the health of america, not just the health care of america. that prevention -- just think of spirit, weeneurial you can start a business and do all of that and not be blocked by your policy. think of what that does in the society and the totality of a
of anity -- vitality community. and lowering cost which is important for everyone concerned starting with individual families. law, we passed a federal the implementation and some of the pioneer work that led up to it was done locally. here.lee, he is thank you, peter. >> we will still do some closing remarks. i want to thank the senior health advisor -- and herb schultz from the obama administration, barbara garcia. and now to join me here to do brief closing remarks, four of the individuals that have helped
in california and the leader in providing this nationally. mark leno. here, can stand from down we have lee lend ye, the senator, and the leadership of california has been about development, local in san francisco but also a legislature that says we will implement the theseable care act, individuals helped to host the hosts but alsohe have been statewide leaders. >> i am holding the microphone. thank you all for being here. let me offer my praise to leader pelosi and president obama. this is a revolutionary accomplishment in washington. we are fortunate to have peter
-- putting this together when he briefed the democratic caucus in the senate, it did take about as long as it took us morning. one of my colleagues said, wouldn't it just have been easier to do single-payer? and i said, yes. year, upwards of 12 million californians did not have health care coverage during the calendar year. and this led to the debate on the senate floor looking at the bill. we have the best healthcare system in the world -- but this is just not true. were ranked 37th among nations and access to health care and quality of healthcare. the cost of healthcare. life expectancy rates and into more tao it he rates. the insult to injury, it is it is forpensive as
our partners. the cost drivers are everything. this is not sustainable. 1960, the united states was playing five percent of gdp on 2000,care costs, 10% by 15% by 2010, now 18%. without the affordable care act, we would hit 50% of gdp on healthcare by 2050. and the brilliance behind the affordable care act is investing in primary and preventive care so we can keep americans healthier, so we won't need all of the -- these things that draw costs upward.
that, we areall of here as ambassadors, from each of the districts to continue to encourage californians to enroll. it is my pleasure to introduce the senior state senator from san francisco. >> thank you very much. is because i am senior that i have a little bit more history. there was as ago, bill that came before the senate health committee, it was a healthcare reform but it was unfortunately not the healthcare reform that i could support. -- we killedwas
that bill. it was not single-payer. the fact is there was an individual mandate. now, we have this particular that it is think incumbent upon all of us to do everything that we can to make this bill and this law a success. the only way to make this bill and this law a success in this country is we have to reach out to many individuals who are not here. part individuals who are of the language minority community. individuals in this country don't understand why i need to have health care. those of the individual populations that i have to get out there and talk to you all, you all need to talk to and all of the panelists need to talk
to. that, not with a disincentive, but an incentive to say to them it is important to have health care, explain to them why this is. not because they are forced to do that. when you force people to do that, you have penalties -- all you will do is push them away. we have to all work together. this is a heavy lift for all of us. we have to find a way to ensure that everyone will have health care, and that we understand this is the place to get it. introduce, the senior of the legislative delegation for san francisco amiano.hat is tom
>> i know that he meant that as a compliment, he even gave me a bracelet that was inscribed, do not resuscitate. my car was broken into, and unfortunate san francisco experience, so the lesson i learned was not to go to the gym. some comments that he alluded to, this is a significant step and i am excited by it. it does not dampen our commitment to single-payer and universal healthcare. we will get this, hopefully in from a certain generation -- i am concerned about the healthcare needs of the seniors, adult day care and
things that have taken big hits in california. i am looking forward to solving those issues around long-term care. what is happening today, on a personal level, during the hiv particularly in the 70s and the 80s, with the demonization of certain demographics, there was very little advancement, even the middle-class person who contracted aids and had some health insurance, this was considered a pre-existing condition because this was a moral issue for some doctors. died, because they could not get that kind of care. obviously, today that won't happen. to be the fortunate father of a healthy san francisco -- this has been a
good season for san francisco. when we rolled this out in the chinatown clinic, some of them came with their kids and for the first time they were allowed to have access to healthcare. there are some little demons out you want to know, check my facebook. we somehow think that healthy seven cisco is in opposition to the aca. department of health when we talked about healthy san francisco and how because of political pressure, the undocumented -- and programs like healthy san francisco would stay in place and complement this, and make sure that we had a safety net.
this is not the antithesis. this is a complement that enriches. for those who want to mess with visit to thent a emergency room, it is not broke, don't fix it. >> thank you, tom. my purpose is to warm up for tom, not to pick up after he left off. it is great to be here. delegation fore years and years -- thank you for being here, leader pelosi. happen --ing this without your help this would never have happened. we have so many people and all
of you are here because you are community leaders. networks, with access to other individuals and businesses and people, there are other community leaders. we need your help to get the word out. i have 40,000 people in my district without health insurance. we have to make sure that we are working hand-in-hand to pick that up. weekly, weppened so are just giving out materials and many other language materials are lacking because of that. we need your help if you are covering communities that don't speak english. if this is going to the community clinics, small businesses or any of the different areas where these communities congregate. what we will do in october is
have many enrollments there, asking for your help to bring people into the system. this is the worst time for us to this isked so hard, -- what we are focused on right now and we are asking you for help. we need your help to make sure that everyone you can think about their who needs this service and wants the service has this. window, where they can enroll. because things are moving so quick we, we need your help. please work with cover california, and thank you so much for your efforts. >> thank you. to recognize the supervisor david campos is here. from the city of san francisco. thank you. >> with that, we will close the town hall but i want to close
that with the thanks to the leaders and those of you who joined us by being partners and asking questions, engaging with us, you are part of history. you, come to coverag eca.com and you can like us on facebook. >> on the c-span town hall, we ask, who is the future of your political party? join us for a two-hour discussion. this year there are two gubernatorial races in the united states. new jersey, where chris christie is clinging to a 30 point lead over his hapless democratic opponent. >> he clearly outweighs her. >> he outweighs most people.
jersey and i will say this about chris christie. a lot of conservatives are not enamored by him. come to new jersey and when you spend time in new jersey you will understand that regardless of what you think about him on a national stage, he has been the best thing to happen to my state in my lifetime. the state has been run by bullies for decades and it got us into trouble. chris christie is a little bit tenacious, but that is what we needed. , there is also a gubernatorial contest. behalf, only on my own not urging you to support any candidate, i will say that came cchninellie -- ken ku is in a toss-up with mccollumn.
there are a lot of undecided voters. wondering -- he is probably in more need of help than chris christie. without pointing out that last i ofrd, there are a couple elections on september 10 in colorado. and those will be fascinating to watch. of the insidesome dynamics about those last night from the state senators. let's look at 2014. colorado constitution has said that we the people, may petition to fire a state legislator during the middle of his term for cause as the people
may see fit. it does not just have to be malfeasance. morris -- andjohn the senator from pueblo, a blue- they aremocrat town -- on the ballot to be recalled of deep objections by their constituents to particularly, the gun grabbing ahead of newst york mayor michael bloomberg in the last legislative session. in the history of colorado it has never been that the state legislators were fired in the midterm. that is what he means. >> it is interesting just on the topic of new york city, the and is a slurpee grabber,
may be replaced by the most amateur photographer -- most famous amateur photographer. >> you can watch more on the c- span town hall. also, you can send your comments and tweets, this is live at 7 p.m. eastern. a minnesota senator speaks to north iowa democrats tomorrow. she is the keynote speaker of their fundraiser. and the first democratic hopeful to visit iowa for a possible presidential campaign. live coverage gets underway on friday iran sees and. now, john mccain holds a town hall meeting in tucson, talking
about a range of issues including immigration policy, healthcare and gun control. this is an hour and 15 minutes. >> christina's parents are here. christina will always be in our thoughts and prayers. i know that you have a message for me. finishwill wait until i my two hours of opening remarks, we will be glad to hear from you and other members of the audience. say, can you hear me ok in the back? frank, our beloved friend who passed away, our thoughts and prayers are with his family. today, as ie you usually do, to listen to you and exchange our thoughts and i know that we will do that in a
respectful manner, including the views of others we may disagree with. this makes it less -- less fun but this is more enlightening. thanks, it is great to be back. a lot of things are going on in the world. i would like to mainly have my remarks about comprehensive immigration reform. states senate passed a comprehensive immigration reform bill that passed by a very large majority in the united states senate. now it is up to the house of representatives. i believe this legislation is not perfect. legislationk any that is a series of compromises that need to be made, is perfect. you, also would submit to
that this microphone is provided to you by the democratic national committee. so -- there are a few fundamentals on this issue i would like to point out. one is that we have 11 million people residing in this country illegally. many of them have come here recently, a large majority have been here for a long time. in my view that is amnesty because we don't think we will rally 11 million people to send them back to wherever they came from. the next thing you know, somebody will start doing. all of us need to address
this issue. people have different views as to how we address this issue on the 11 million people living in i would be eager to listen to your view. but the approach we took us to have the legalization of people december 11e before 2011, theyious year, would have legal status as long to make sureable they had not committed crimes and were law-abiding citizens. law-abiding citizens. they would have legal status. they would have to pay the fee because this is paid for by the fees that would be levied on the occasional tax dollars.
after 10 years they would be allowed to apply for a green card. and they would continue on the path to citizenship. part of this is because we have to secure our borders and get control of our borders, we need apply paye people who the back taxes, learn english, and get in line behind all of those who came to the country legally. so you are the one to blame. work-release program. anyway. to get in line behind all of those who came to this country legally. there are some concessions to that.
agricultural workers -- i would be more than happy to describe that to you. andar as science technology the postgraduate students, who are in the postgraduate toversities, if they want they can stay in the country with the green card. over half the students who are with technology and engineering and mathematics are not citizens of this country. we will give those students the opportunity to stay in the united states without having to go back to india or china or wherever they came from. workers, agricultural we would have an expanded program for agricultural workers, and we have the low income worker visa as well.
40% of the people in this country illegally did not cross the border illegally. they overstayed their work visa. the only real answer to that problem, is everify. everyone must have documentation, that they are in this country legally. if that employer hires them, this is part of their penalty. -- stop the magnet of people taking to this country to work. and people who hire people who come here legally. that is part of the proposal --
i want to mention a couple of aspects of it. this is part of the biggest with the i have seen, chamber of commerce, they present this to us and the agricultural workers and the growers came to an agreement and they brought this to us. we have the evangelical community behind us. the high-tech community -- this is a broad coalition of interests. let me make a couple more points, and then we will respond. it is important to of you to realize what the congressional budget office has said.
they are respected by one and all for their opinions on the economy. the congressional budget office says that this legislation would reduce the deficit i $850 billion over the next 20 years. and they would at 300 billion to the social security trust fund. senate --to this, the with the path to citizenship and the expanded visa program, the economic output of arizona would $660 million.y in 2014 and it would increase the total personal income by $2.5 billion in 2020. the border is not secure. is more than -- when we
gave amnesty for these people. we can survey land the tech. there was the ied. this tracks them back to where they came from. this amazing technological advance. the surveillance i am talking the equipment we have to put in to do that, we got directly from the border patrol. there are nine sectors on the border, between california and texas. if we are put in that
technology, which is appropriated in the bill, it will not require additional taxpayer funding. it -- we will have 90% effective control. there is a lot more i could tell you about this. i am interested in your views. and the congressional delegation wet i respect and admire -- senators think that we are snobs and we are. our for republican members in inquired daily about my health. so, could i ask for your consideration? i ask for your consideration that because i think a nation --nded on judeo-christian would want to discuss this issue before us.
what we would like to see is the house of representatives passed legislation, if this is piecemeal or however they want to. this is part of the procedure. they would get majorities in both house and senate and be signed by the president of the united states. i would like to crows mild -- close my remarks by telling you about an experience i had. senator lieberman and senator graham of south carolina -- i had gone there for the fourth of july. we do the reenlistment ceremony or an award ceremony. in 2007, general petraeus asked
us to go to the reenlistment womenny of 220 men and who were reenlisting to stay. people with green cards. if you have a green card and you join the military with an accelerated path to citizenship, that were going to receive citizenship at the same time. this came in, i saw four chairs, with the citizenship ceremony taking place. i said, what is that? he said, these individuals were killed in the last 48 hours and we will make them citizens.
like that,e things it gives you an idea of how patriotic and wonderful it is, and what a great opportunity we have in this country for those who desire citizenship. i am asking you to consider that we have an acceptable situation as it is today, and we have to all work together, to try to the issue. i will welcome all comments and insults that you may have. >> we know that you -- you were there wasus and also,
agree, weee or don't feel that there are some things that could be done. >> i would be honored to do so. we continue with the advocacy. have -- dealt with the pain associated -- with a loss of a child and there is no word i comfort, --ffer in so we thank you for your continued advocacy. we will do that, for sure.
>> i actually have a lot of things i want to ask you but i know i can't do that. and immigration -- >> whatever is on everyone's mind except for the approval rating of congress. aboute a couple of facts what your opinion is that we should be doing? paper,ay and in today's we have $13 million on 21 homes that were built at a cost of $600,000. it just shows the waste we have in government. i would like to see something any of thats how can be justified. i would like to have this
conversation continue. this can't be. the day before the justice department came out and said they would not seek charges the border patrol agent accused of killing individuals. there is no justification for this to continue to go on and there should be charges against these agents. ago, there were two shootings in october involving agents in arizona. one had to do with friendly fire, the idea that two agents -- didt there and did not know the other agent was out there, they both shot at each other and one agent was killed,
the supervisor should be held accountable. then we had another shooting that took place at the border. went up patrol agent opening,through an hitting a six-year-old shot -- 16-year-old child in the back seven times and killing them. there is no justification for that. if the reverse had been true and a mexican border patrol agent shot an american child, what do you think would happen? how long will it take for us to hear about this? fbi is doing the research on this. the border patrol would not do me any information. think i deserve an answer from
either organization. talke immigration bill we about adding 20,000 border patrol agent's. have,ents that we unfortunately a large number of to bere not all a fight in the position we are in. what we need 20,000 more agents for, i don't know. >> thank you for your passion. first, all that i can say is investigations need to be conducted and house oversight -- sabotage.be -- this is a left-wing conspiracy. be -- your question is serious and deserves a serious answer.
i thank you for your passion. happen thereings have to be investigations and oversight by congress. in fast and furious -- we were sending weapons down into mexico that were being used i drug cartels. there has to be an investigation brian terry was shot and killed by an armed mexican. and a rancher from southern arizona was shot and killed by armed individuals which we assume were people who were members of the drug cartels. this is a dangerous place. when we have these armed drug cartels, moving drugs, most rugs are going across the border, coming across our border in arizona, you have guys on top
of mountain tops, guiding the cartels, through tucson and into phoenix, and throughout the country. we have a serious problem. it requires us to have a national discussion because the problem, mainly, is the drug cartels and the violent side of is a demand for drugs in the united states of america. whether they have a submarine, like i have seen in colombia. it is a violent place when you have armed members bringing drugs across the border into our country. i do not excuse any action that took place