tv House Session CSPAN April 24, 2015 10:00am-2:29pm EDT
vide minimum material support to work with the individuals and respond to individual protection needs, but there is no allusion here that anything significant on our part is affected -- is effectively changing the situation in a big way, which i daresay it's very often the case with this placed populations because of the nature of the conflict that they regrettably find themselves in. and libya is a more extreme and factual -- extreme example of that. i guess in the current map of conflict and internal strife. so, we watch carefully and optimistically the work of the special representative to fund political solutions. apparently, this is a slow and complicated process that is
happening in multiple countries, dealing with multiple actors. so, here again, i think patience is the key. and in that rather sad landscape, tunisia is a perl of reception -- pearl of reception, of understanding. so naturally, i think all who care are very grateful for the excellent support that has been provided by tunisia. when you think of the tunisian case, i, in my background, think as well of lebanon and other countries that have been impacted by the -- the surge of instability and insecurity in north africa, as well as in the center of the middle east around the syrian refugee album because there are -- refugee problem because there are relations. and has been a focus on how
lebanon has been impacted -- in particular, lebanon -- by how the incredible number of refugees. i think we also have to think about tunisia in a significant way. and we can provide, as an international community, direct support for relief to refugees. but, as you have said, they are part of the community in many ways. they are being integrated through municipal services health, education. they are living in rented buildings, and they are working on the savings that they have had, the resources that they were able to bring. but this is a protracted displacement. those resources will run dry. when that happens, we'll find ourselves -- and it has happened sooner and lebanon because of the dramatic quality of war in syria.
when that happens, those people will suffer more -- more clearly and it will have a more dramatic impact on tunisia. so we have to already anticipate -- we have to anticipate the problems that will come with marginalization, with exclusion with poverty and with the fact that they are not tunisian it as you said, tunisia had already quite an experience at the the revolution receiving tens of thousands of foreigners, including refugees. in its territory, and dealing with them in a most -- in a most hospitable way. so the high commissioner has been looking at this question and advocating for a more proactive approach to development. this is not a relief situation. tunisia is a middle income
country, just as egypt on the other side. therefore, not necessarily eligible for the types of grants that would normally come from development agencies and international financial institutions, like the world bank. it sadly doesn't qualify. but we are trying to make the case -- and i guess this is a very effective platform for doing so -- that it is in the collective interests of the global north and of the people of tunisia and of the libyans as well who were impacted by this that we should think about creative ways to help affected countries to engage in structural, bilateral, and multilateral development support. that we shouldn't have to wait until the crisis becomes -- well, until the problem becomes a crisis.
but engage more proactively from the get-go. tunisia is a case in point precisely because of the economic hardships that you mentioned. that are facing the country, in terms of gdp and so on. but there are other examples around the nigerian situation cameroon niger lebanon, and jordan are other important examples, as well as turkey to a certain extent, when development -- institutions and development resources -- that is the key -- can be leveraged to provide more support not only to help the countries of asylum, but to give more space and to hopefully address this problem which is, i think, critical of hospitality fatigue, of humanitarian fatigue so that there is a more concrete and short-term benefit beyond the cooking pots and the blankets and the very punctual
support to a school here or a medical center there. so this is something that we have been pressing for and looking for creative ways to make that happen. there are some opportunities in the months to come through the g7 conversations or the next annual meeting of the world bank with whom we have been working for closely on this. and we hope there will be advocates in this room and elsewhere to help find the key to a more creative and flexible approach to concessional loans that recognize, in a context like tunisia, the openness that you have shown as a country and as a nation to refugees from libya and elsewhere. the third piece that i would like to very quickly mention, of course, is that the havoc in libya, the vacuum of authority, the insecurity creates a pathway -- however risky it may be --
for syrians and others to try to make their way to safer shores in the north. and also for some of the 40,000 or so refugees themselves to exit. so we have seen from libya over recent months and years in increase -- an increase in the outflow of both people. i call them both people not to conjure up images of years ago but that is what they are. you have seen in the tragedy on the mediterranean last week that they run a terrific risk in doing what they do. it is not a choice. it is not a poll. they are not economic migrants most of them. they are forced to flee because of the circumstances in their home countries. it is a tragedy within a tragedy, and fact, that they have had to leave syria or other
countries from which they fled to seek asylum in libya, or to transit through such an insecure environment and be at the behest of traffickers that are also able to flourish in such an environment in order to make their way, or to try and make their way, to europe. and elsewhere. in order to find safety. so, i hope we can talk more about that, but i just also don't want to abuse my opening time to draw the link between libya, the neighborhood in north africa. i didn't become but egypt, but the same principles exist in general but tunisia's open border policy is clearly something that we are very appreciative of. and also to make the link that it is the broader region and it has a global impact. thank you very much. co-chair elizabeth: thank you and thank you to all of you. before we open it up to discussion, i thought we were might have a little conversation
among ourselves. we know from other experiences that the longer people are displaced, the more protective the situation, the less likely they aren't -- they are to go home. other steps that could be taken now that might facilitate an eventual return of libyans from tunisia and elsewhere? megan bradley: i think that there are steps. one issue, for example, that will need to be considered is the question of restitution. that will be a very complex process. when there are large-scale displacements. in libya, it is going to be all the more complicated because the restitution claims are also intertwined with the practices of the qaddafi regime over decades. the qaddafi regime would use land conflicts and the allocation of land resources as a way of playing different groups off of one another. and this, of course, result in very complex overlapping claims to the same property.
so, in terms of thinking into the future, when we can hope to see the situation sorted out the restitution piece is going to be a big part of that. i think that there is work that can be done in terms afford planning for strategies -- forward planning for strategies that can address those situations. i think there are ways in which they can be effective forward planning. it might take -- be some idealistic figures at this moment because the security search are paramount, but i think it behooves of us to do what we can. co-chair elizabeth: i want to turn to this issue of hospitality or hospitality fatigue. when you step back from this region, we are just overwhelmed with humanitarian simultaneous make a crisis. everybody i know in the humanitarian sector is exhausted running from one crisis to another and trying to raise money. in this situation, tunisia gets
very little international attention. here i am struck by the fact that you have had this hospitable reaction to refugees from a neighboring country for several years now. is there anything that the international community can do to recognize the tremendous efforts tunisia has done to address that compassion? >> humanitarian fatigue is a common feature all over the web. but i think it is gone for the by this illusion meant. they will have economic opportunities, employment for everybody and very high standards of living. the economic laws are not there yet, so there is a sense of dissolution at least --
dissolution -- disillusion. to be honest, too, there is some allusions about the international community and sometimes about our neighbors. tunisians thought they were generous, but they made sacrifices. but the -- when there were possibilities in these countries, tunisians were more concentrated -- were not considered immediately do have some opportunities. so there is a sense of general fatigue because of the efforts being made and a longtime effort being made, but also because there is disillusionment. in terms of what can be done the international community could help.
the libyan authorities, could also help. one of the issues is that tunisians have had this discussion before, that we have libyans living here. but they are benefiting from subsidies. we cannot limit subsidies to tunisians only. -- particularly in the energy sector. it did not work, but now the situation is even worse with the fighting between government or authorities in libya. the international community, i mean, we always hear about these complaints. in italy, and france, but as you have just mentioned, it does not compare with what tunisia is
doing without complaining. 5000 or something, and all the press is involved in the issue. we are receiving millions. in a sense, then is to be more international responsibility, sharing of costs, sharing of sacrifices. that is not taking place but i hope that things will improve. if you help with these countries, maybe can use the influx of migrants to -- megan bradley: just to jump in there was a really interesting piece of public research that was done in march by a french tunisian firm walking incorporation with the foundation. and this research found that when two nations were asked to identify their top two ways in
which the government could help to respond to the libyan crisis, 72% of respondents picked accepting refugees from libya as one of the two key ways to respond. on the one hand, this is a great testimony to how people do continue to maintain a very generous spirit despite this kind of passion -- compassion fatigue. yet, the line was almost with on the line on whether libyan families should be a lot to integrate into tunisian society. there was a lot more resistance to the notions of hospitality going further than just keeping the border open, which i think comes back to this question of hospitality fatigue. kais darragi: if i may? reg out -- shelly pitterman: if i may? reg out -- regrettably, if you
look at the world map, it is only getting worse. every month, there is a new emergency. we just declared moving away from this particular region. we just declare the level one emergency in rwanda because of the outflow of some 8000 refugees. who would have thought after having engaged in a major repatriation program? so, only to suggest that the nature -- the nature of things these times reflects increased conflict, more violent conflict. you spoke of the beheading of the -- more unpredictability but more impunity in less management of existing conflicts. so we have protected emergencies in ways that we didn't have before. you know from your long experience with refugees, and
emergency lasted six months, not five years, like in the middle east now. that is why we think that it is really important to think and bigger terms because the humanitarian financial system is broken. it cannot be -- it cannot sustain this kind of commitment. already, we are satisfied with what we can to when we are 50% funded. and we have had to make some very serious choices. but when it gets to his -- structural support and host countries, we can't wait to engage the international community and that reflection. it is not just a question of being nice or being compassionate, there are security issues for states that are next to some of these failed states where if there is a risk, in these to be addressed in a very proactive way, in a big way
, and that requires more than just a few projects. it requires a more systemic and sustain structural approach. kais darragi: i don't like to be selective and except the first part and reject the second but the second question, if you ask me the same question, i would respond the same way. we think that the idea of integration is not good. but it is not because of rejection. because if you say we would like to have them integrated, there is a recognition of failure of libya. i think it is more rational in the sense that we wish them success and they are welcome here, but we hope that they would have quality solutions in the near future. i would personally think this way, rather than rejection of integration -- now we have,
let's say, one million refugees, but even before the revolution we have always found one million libyans in tunisia coming for careers, medical care. the 10% is always there. but the conditions for good purposes and good reasons, in this case now, it is not a matter of choice. co-chair elizabeth: one? . are european governments doing enough? many of us thought that there was a wonderful italian initiative that ended. not to put you on the spot. shelly pitterman: that was perceived by europe to be a pull factor. without too much controversy, it
is pretty clear now that in the year that has followed, the numbers have increased, the numbers of deaths have increased on the high seas, so it was a good initiative by italy and it should have benefited from more support from europe generally. but that is that. it is what it is, one could say. and now there is the triton alternative approach, which is focused more on border control border management. yesterday, the european council decided to triple the investment in the triton initiative -- the triton operation, which is i guess you know, a fair reaction to what has been happening in the month of april, especially with the last tragedy. most of you should know by now that 900 people or more died in
one single accident. 1200 people have died already on the high seas since -- the beginning of this year. it is not a problem that is going to go away, and now certainly with the season being what it is, it will be more book traffic and hopefully there will be more rescue. but it can be said that germany and sweden, in particular, have been remarkably generous in their approaches. particularly for syrian refugees coming to sweden and to germany as asylum-seekers directly, or through programs of resettlement or humanitarian admissions. we have been calling for a more generous approach using flexible visa family reunification to anything that would allow for
more access, legal safe, secure access by syrian refugees, in particular to european states on a more generalized and equitable basis. that unfortunately, cannot come out of the european council decision yesterday. although, there is more -- there is movement in that direction but no firm decision in that respect. there is still, for a very good reason, a focus on trafficking and on smuggling and that is important in and of itself because it represents risks to migrants enter refugees, but it doesn't provide a safe alternative to those people who are forced to flee to find security and safety. co-chair elizabeth: thanks. we will open it up not to questions and maybe take several at a time. if you could introduce yourself. we will start over here.
>> i would like -- bill lawrence. i would like to press a little forward on that last point. i agree with you that conflict is the main problem here, not just regular old economic deprivation. but if you look at the fact that most tunisians work in the informal economic sector, libyans are being pushed it to work now in the informal sector, that this is informal flow of labor across the mediterranean. that large numbers of these flows are coming from west africa, not just amalia. if you look at the numbers, we have a lot of informal economic sector activity here. when the u.n. looks at livelihoods and crises and how to deal with refugees, how did they deal with the formal economic sector peas and -- pice -- piece?
and megan, you alluded to the tunisian high figures of 1.9 million. and the egyptian side says they have even more libyans. and you aptly pointed out that it is tied to hold -- the whole gaddafi regime. but what models are there for extra reconciliation? there are a lot of libyans who aren't going to go back until they feel there is safety in going back. how do we deal with the international dialogue with the exiled population that fears its return? it is like -- you know, what are the models for that? co-chair elizabeth: let's take a couple more. and if you could stand up please. this gentleman right here. >> thank you.
thank you all very much for your presentations. a question regarding the ipd response. of course, we see in other settings where idp populations are less than accessible, like somalia or syria, that humanitarian organizations often use remote control mechanisms, working from a neighboring country, and using particularly local actors, local ngos to distribute the aid within a country. that is never a perfect solution, especially when it comes to entering proper protection for idp's, but i wonder if you could talk about the extent to which this is being used or being considered for the libyan context? co-chair elizabeth: thank you. and we will take the gentleman in the very back there. >> independent consultant on humanitarian issues. a comment and a question. first, as someone who has often
pointed to flaws, i figured is only fair to give the law a lot of credit for the reporting that you have done. in their annual reports over the last several years unhcr has consistently reported on the number of deaths at sea of people trying to flee the horn of africa and northern africa to europe and other parts of the middle east. on an annual basis, the estimates have been 2000 to 3000 per year peers at sea. so this is not new. the only difference in this latest incident last week is that they were all on one chip. if those 900 people had been on four different ships, it would not have been in the media and we would not be hearing about it. but this is not new and have had this in the reporting for several years. which leads me to my question, properly to shelley, but also if the other panelists have views on this.
on this migration, asylum seeking, fleeing by boat. in libya does u.n. hcr and its partners have any leverage to influence the most dangerous and abusive practices of the traffickers? and similar to that, does the u.n. hcr and its partners -- have they had any success in raising awareness among would-be asylum seekers and migrants before they depart libya about safer alternatives to reach their destination? thank you. co-chair elizabeth: we have some complex questions here. i invite anybody to jump in and answer. the question on the relationship of informal migrants. external reconciliation. the question of u.n. hcr and others doing remote management.
and does u.n. hcr have any influence with the tracking element? who would like to begin? shelly pitterman: the direct response to the question about the labor sector, it is not so much in the countries of origin, so to speak, that we are engaged. but certainly in the countries of asylum, we are trying to get more involved and hear the buzz word, the keyword from the official word is resilient. for example, in the context of the syrian refugee response, or the first time, and in a collaborative way, and hopefully it will be effective in terms of generating new rear sources we'll talk not only about responding to the refugee
piece of armor in the countries of asylum, but also resilient the host community and putting into a certain activities through undp through other development organizations to respond to the impact of a large number of refugees on the services in coast countries. and livelihoods, and helping refugees, and helping people in the host community to keep up income generation. what we are already seeing, and this comes back to the earlier point that i may, is that the are inadequate responses because of the availability of funds. we begin to tap into the development pool of funding, there are inadequate responses to the kind of issues that were respectingve to tunisia, and those
that have sure cruel challenges in a big way that impact on national security in the short or medium term. what we are going for it is essential, but is insufficient. i thinks in terms of keeping asylum space preserved, and also keeping countries that do provide asylum, secure. that is the first piece. the second is that we have never denied the movements whether it is in the caribbean, or the red sea, or the east pacific, or in the mediterranean. there need to be mechanisms which are lacking in all for example -- four examples for identified people who are in need of international section -- protection.
and those who are migrants, addressing their concerns however that is done by iom and my most country, and if that is done according to the law returning the safely to the point of departure or the country of origin. those mechanisms are not in place anywhere. in the systematic, coherent, and predictable way. that is why the high commissioner took the initiative last december to take a dialogue on protection at sea, which was well-timed of an order to have all states think about the mechanisms that need to be introduced in order to provide those protections only the one hand, and protect the state interest on the other. not they are mutually exclusive. a quick reply on the remote management for idps, it is a
very modest, as i indicated. we have our international presence on to it is. -- out of tunis. we were with ngos, both national and international to do what we can. the program is underfunded, access is very limited. there is no pretense that what we are doing is anything on the order of the cross line operations, or the cross-border operations as well in syria. for other idp emergency circulations -- situations. thank you for your observation we have always, together with iom, spoken about deaths to the extent that we can count them. they are not our numbers but we publish them because they are a
part of the movement of people who have concern, or potential concern. i misquoted the number of deaths on the men's. since january the 17t -- it is 1776. it is a number i should have remembered. the numbers are not as precise as we pretend. several dozen in the caribbean already this year that we get from the u.s. coast guard, from the bohemian, from the turks and caicos coast guard as well. i have to say that my short answer to your question is i do not know, but i do not think so. i do not imagine that you have relationships as such with traffickers to guide them on
best practice. [laughter] shelly pitterman: the need to reduce structures -- introduce structures that address the needs of asylum-seekers. 2-d give them legal alternatives through creative or flexible lease arrangement humanitarian programs, in order to be able to have more safe options. megan bradley: it is certainly
true that historically reconciliation processes have tended to be nationally bound. they have not taken into account the regional and cross-border dynamics. of refugee flows in the way that refugees can be spoilers in the context of processes. that said, there have been some interesting developments on this point. in libya particularly, there has been some individually driven efforts to try to have reconciliation and dialogue with
libyans, these processes have been severely criticized by people within libya who are opposed to the notion of reconciliation. as we saw in our research, strong relevance of this divide of perceived loyalists and revolutionaries. someone suggested in the context of the violence of 2014 it has been reduced. that is not so much the case, with the regime long-standing. violence will run deep. the other thing on this question of external processes is that we tend to focus on reconciliation as a formal process of dialogue and have people sit down around the
table and dialogue. what i have seen in my research is that reconciliation can often be significantly promoted through reestablishing economic ties. for example supporting families to reconnect across borders, communities to reconnect across borders. these kinds of economically rooted and informal processes can be just as significant if not more significant than the political process. on the question of the reward -- reward border management, it is important to see that the libyans have been carrying the weight in response to the ip situation, and not moving forward perhaps it will be important to think seriously about the role of cross-border relief in thinking about the experiences that have taken place in syria. they could have some important
insights for the limited case thessaly in case. kais darragi: that reminds me that we have another category of refugees including the u.s. embassy, the canadian embassy, and 70 embassies that so many embassies. the issue is about this mix between economic asylum-seekers and political once. es. the major one that problem that we are seeing is that of push factors. it is something we have not seen for so many years. we are thinking about 14 to 15 million idp's.
take this opportunity to smuggle themselves into this wave into your economic asylum-seekers. we deal with the catastrophe and try to find solutions to it some vascular solut then we can really separate between the genuine asylum-seekers and the economic asylum-seekers. we need to focus on this issue before those who are the opportunistic --. i think that yesterday i was listening to npr and the united nations secretary general was talking about these issues and he talked about the 1970's were countries like canada, u.s.,
europe have formally welcomed thousands of people from for my other countries in the region. it was a successful model. they're good citizens in these countries, they have children they are fully integrated, and to beating to the economies of these countries. shelly pitterman:co-chair elizabeth: another round of questions. >> i've from the rollback. thank you very much for this interesting discussion. for picking up the topic of these though in context has been overshadowed by the other development i have two questions. we are reading very different numbers in the news, i will wage across cross mediterranean. we know that they are migrants who were working in libya some
who is leading some who had returned and some were still there. there were some recognized refugees. i was wondering anybody had sure what's actually happening there. we leave read a lot of anecdotal evidence. i have no present -- we remember millions of people. i was wondering if we had a little bit more information about the different groups that are there, and what their economic status and their well-being is like. this information would be very important to the tunisian authorities to have, to have a targeted approach to how to truly act for these refugees and how to react in the state of the
tunisian economy. >> hello. i'm from the u.s. conference of catholic bishops. my question is about to durable solutions in this situation. especially in libya, and indonesia. -- in tunisia. you of course, mentioned that the great hope for the vast majority is to return when there is peace, and certainly the tunisian country is overloaded in the terms of integration for people. my questions about resettlement, and what really think it has in the situation. both in terms of protecting people, and also giving alternatives to that dangerous flight.
>> i've from the national endowment for democracy. thank you for this timely panel. i have two questions. first, understanding the constraints and the limitations of working with idp's inside libya. those coming out of the city of benghazi, which has been under heavy bombardment for the past year. what can of services are being provided to the any fees -- i dp's from other organizations? what about tunisia, and the situation of libya outflow refugees veteran egypt, turkey jordan, other host countries? thank you. co-chair elizabeth: one last
question in the back. >> i am the secretary of -- i am familiar with the situation in tunisia, i have been in libya from 2009-2012, and participated in the situation for over 100,000 refugees. i have a comment, to shun the light on the situation in egypt about the libyans there. the number of libyans who are only libyans, they are not libyan egyptians, we are talking about 700,000. before the revolution, that is when we had one half million libyans living in egypt. there are no campus in egypt for
refugees. all of these people are living in houses and and they have services for universities and schools. they are used to live like egyptians. we have a similar problem like tunisia, that we could not -- at the same time, egypt receives large numbers of error refugees from other countries, not only libya. about a quarter million iraqis are living in egypt. and now we have 350,000 syrians and we used to have one million sudanni.
we are still suffering with increasing intensity of the problem of the refugees from arab countries, like tunisia. but the problem for us, we have humanitarian, and it is very important for security. after the revolution, many libyans, many of them supporters of gaddafi, they came to egypt and they have represented a security threat in egypt because they are used to fighting. not only is it a very big number
of weapons that are smuggled from libya to egypt after the revolution, do not forget it is a number of extremists that are in the western part of libya. it is a very big challenge for egypt. the it incident that happened last year that happened for the egyptian border guard when they were assassinated from groups coming from libya. it is highly complicated for us not only in egypt, not only humanitarian an economy security arm is very important for us. i have tried only to shed light on the situation.
two. hank you. co-chair elizabeth: it shows this is not an easy issue. we have some difficult questions for the panel. different groups of libyan refugees resettlement integration, and so forth through a cap services are being provided to idp's in benghazi? we also has some responsibly into question. best we also had some response on the egypt question. kais darragi: the different categories in tunisia. we cannot come with a number the margins are quite narrow. we do not have any precise figures.
no clear census. this is one of the issues that they have undergone. we have a study on the impact of the libyans indonesia. -- in tunisia. most of the libyans in tunisia do not have economic problems. maybe detect by the more you move north the richer you are. those who are rich or into this in particular.
there are not some who have financial difficulties and will of schooling and getting to access to the health system. the other thing about the political affiliation, there is no money that you see, we have seen some minor tension between different libyans in tunisia. maybe most of them are citizens, but we do n have -- do not have any kind of idea about that . but we managed to contain between libyans, and the problems are very minor incidents and are totally under control. thanks to the libyans themselves
, because they are behaving properly. shelly pitterman: my answer is short. i don't know. i don't know. i do not know the answer to the libyans, somebody else does, about how many potential people there are that will leave by boat. i just don't know. there may be some estimates on there, but it cannot happen to know them. as far as the level of assistance, i think i intimated that it is inadequate. it is focused on nonfood items to those who can get access. we always try to provide direction support for children who are impacted, for women specific and and specific groups who might need counseling. but i cannot pretend that it is more than it is. partly as a function of axes,
partly it is a function of resources. it is certainly not a function of will, and making -- and as i intimated before we rely on national ngos as well. that is the libyan red crescent. we are looking for folks who've been returned or intercepted by the libyan coast guard and brought to detention centers where the conditions are not good and we provide support to the in collaboration with the national medical corps. this is what we can do. the bottom line is that in fact it is true that this situation has not benefited from the level of media public, and donor attention as much as it should which relates to my point about bandwidth and financial
resources. to the extent that the world bank and tunisia are in communication, we might want to think about what flexible and creative options there will be. when we did go for the syrian refugee appeal, i mentioned that we have in our review response plan and installment -- an element of resilience in the host community. there were chapters that were crafted by jordan and lebanon to space to their needs as far as services and infrastructure support in a bigger way. that might be a useful reference as well for tunisia. with respect to resettlement, i think the question is quite timely and i think that i must
admit i do not know the answer and what the prospects are preprocessing out. but it would fall within the framework of giving, especially for europe, and organized, legal alternative to receive refugees who are now in trouble in libya. and we have nationalities, where syrian refugees as well, about half as we are able to estimate and be in contact with them of the 40,000 or so refugees. but there are also, as i mentioned, eritrean refugees, let me mention some of the other nationalities. palestinian refugees iraq, sudan, among others. megan bradley: on the question
of resettlement, i think when we reflect on developments for libyans, we also recognize that 1% refugees obtain resettlement. for them to aggressively activist resettlement there would have to be a real shift and the approach to start with a much more comprehensive registration process that can identify who is most in need of resettlement, given that it is now widely understood that the resettlement opportunities should be provided as a protection tool. it is also for to recognize that the settlement would be a very limited access, if any to idp's. we tend to focus on resettlement and it can subtract attention from the larger numbers of people who are trapped within their own countries, and will never happen opportunity to participate in
the process. on the solutions question, i would also stress that it is important to recognize, in a case like this that durable solutions are not going to mean an and to mobility. participation -- there are long-standing libyan communities in egypt and tunisia, and that kind of movement will be aren't what a durable solution to the situation looks like. we should not expect that all of a sudden we will have a more sedentary dynamic in the region. people will continue to engage in mobility as a part of their livelihood strategies and their way of life. in terms of the question on the economic status and well-being
of libyans in tunisia, it is great to hear that a study is being contemplated that will look at those issues from a quantitative perspective. the qualitative research we did for this study certainly cannot be generalized to the whole population, but does underline that while the majority of exiled libyan r&d middle-class, there are people who are facing real of our smith -- impoverishment, and are being pushed to negative coping strategies to deal with that reality. in his important that we not lose sight of that population in the particular protection concerns that they have. co-chair elizabeth: i want to thank all of the panelists. these are complex issues. descriptions of the terminology, they are all human beings. they are caught a conflict, they are fleeing for their lives they are scared, they are poor and these sessions that have to remember that these are people
we are talking about with seriously. join me in thanking our panelists. [applause] >> if you missed any of this discussion on refugees and the libyan crisis you can watch it any time at our video library at c-span.org. we have more live coverage coming up on c-span. 1:15 p.m. susan rice gives the keynote address at the export import national conference. and at 2:00 p.m. the farewell ceremony for outgoing attorney
general eric holder. the senate yesterday confirmed loretta lynch to take over the post in a 56-43 vote president obama will be in the night entertainment will be provided by saturday night life cecily strong. >> the studio musical acts, and there was a juggling act at one point. says the association started having comedians come cecily strong will be the fourth woman performing. it is important to have different perspectives, and i think she is funny.
she is sharp, cunning, and she will bring it a little bit. >> live coverage of the white house correspondents dinner, including red carpet arrivals will begin saturday at 6 p.m. eastern. >> she was considered modern for her time, called mrs. president carter her detractors and was outspoken about her views on avery and women's rights as one of the most epic writers of any first lady supervise unique window into colonial america and her personal life. abigail adams, on our series first ladies. cementing the public and private life of our first ladies. and is equivalent to the series, c-span's new book is now available, first ladies
presidential historians on the lives of 51 of our first women. [applause] >> president clinton spoke at georgetown as part of a four part series called the clinton lectures. >> and good morning. it is my pleasure and privilege to welcome you to georgetown. i wish to thank all of you for being here and to offer a
special word of welcome to artist in question guest and attendance. including tom hill sachs, the secretary of agriculture, and congressman john delaney, we are honored to have you with us this morning. we have had the privilege over the course of the last decades to welcome president clinton back to georgetown on a number of occasions. he was here in 1991. he was on these steps in 1993 just days before his inauguration. and now, for this series, in his first lecture of this series, president clinton spoke of the significance of those 1991 lectures, now known as the "new covenant speeches" on responsibility and rebuilding american community, economic change, and american security. not only to his campaign, but also for his vision, were our future. he explained these lectures enabled him to "think about where we were, where we wanted to go, and how we propose to get there."
we have come together to engage the wisdom and insights of one of the most accomplished leaders of our time. as president, he presided over the longest economic expansion in american history, including the creation of more than 22 million jobs, the reform of the welfare and health care systems, new environmental regulations, peacekeeping missions in places such as bosnia, and a federal budget requests. in the years since, his two-term presidency, the first democrat since franklin delano roosevelt he has focused on improving global health, education, and economic development around the world through the bill, hillary, and chelsea clinton foundation which he founded in 2001. in these lectures, he brings to
bear these experiences, and those of his youth and early political career. a 1968 alumnus of our school, a rhodes scholar, a yale law graduate, attorney general, and then governor of arkansas. a former instructor who taught clinton during his first year has described him as someone who "thinks deeply." when people are well-informed and deeply reflective, that gives them the security and freedom to listen to a wide spectrum of opinions. clinton was not a man who was closed in that not closed in his thinking, because he thinks deeply. it is only fitting for this
lecture on the theme of purpose, father hence will serve as our moderator during the question and answer session that will follow president clinton's remarks. with this theme purpose, president clinton turns to each of us, as he did during those formative new covenant speeches to speak to all of you, future leaders of our nation, to think deeply about our own responsibilities, about where we are, where we want to go, and how we propose together to get there. he asked, what is required of us? how do we compose and live a life where service is important? today we come together to consider in during -- enduring questions, how do we understand our purpose and are -- our responsibilities, our service to the common good and to each other. ladies and gentlemen, it is now my privilege to welcome to the
stage, the 42nd president of the united states, and a true son of georgetown, president bill clinton. [applause] bill clinton: thank you very much. thank you. thank you. [applause] thank you to the president, for having me back. thank you father hence for agreeing to ask me questions. i'll give better answers than i did 50 years ago, i hope. thank you all for coming. students, faculty, friends of georgetown, secretary, thank you very much for being here and for your long career in public service. congressman john delaney, who is
a shining hope for the possibility of bipartisan cooperation. he has a bill to repatriate all of this loose cash hanging around overseas that has as many republican as democratic sponsors, some people think there is something wrong with that, i think it is a good idea. i want to thank my classmates and friends who are here. let's get this show on the road. two years i ago i came here in april, intending to give a series of three or four lectures on composing a life in public service. whether that is in elected or appointed office, or in the right of sector, or -- private sector, or nongovernmental organization. in a first talk, i said there
were four essential elements to any successful service. the focus on people, policy politics, and purpose. in that first lecture i was primarily focused on the importance of people centered service. on the necessity of understanding how different people view themselves in the world they are living in. without understanding people it is hard to develop the best policies and build and maintain support for them. as i said then, i grew up in a storytelling culture. so i told you stories about people who taught me that everyone has a story and kept me focused on how to help other people have better stories. i told you stories about my family, and my teachers beginning in junior high and running through georgetown. about people i had worked with through the years. people i met who were dealing
with their own life struggles. the second lecture covered policymaking and the compromises almost always involved when trying to do what machiavelli called, the most difficult thing in all of human affairs, to change the established order of things. we discussed how policy meeting making -- policymaking was done when i was president of the economic plan in 1993 which reversed 12 years of trickle down economics. it gave us the only time in 50 years when all sections of the economy were robust. the bottom 20% rose is the same tae -- rose at the same rate as
the top 5%. we talked about grafting the welfare reform bill of 1996, what compromises were acceptable, what has worked over the long run, what still needs to be changed. we talked about the pursuit of peace in the middle east. i hope that talk convinced you that policy actually matters. that ideas, when implemented have consequences. different ideas have different consequences. a great deal of political rhetoric is devoted to blurring that. to pretending that if something good happens and the other guy did it was an accident. if something bad happens and you did it, it couldn't have been because you pursued the wrong policy. because of so much of our voting habits today are determined by the culture in which we live and the conditions in which we experience the world, we tend to blur all of that. i hope i convinced you that when
ever you are trying to evaluate policy s you should try to ask your self is there a difference between a story and the story line? always look for the story. sometimes it is in the story line, sometimes it is not. there is a difference between the headlines, and the trendlines. typically, for perfectly , understandable reasons, bad news makes better news than good news. sometimes the trendlines are much better. we might revisit that. today i want to talk about the purpose of public service. driven by a concern for people, that is what i am advocating. i wanted to talk about the politics of turning concern into
real changes that fulfill your purpose. i will not talk about electoral politics. [laughter] but it is important to remember there is plenty of politics when the election is over. you are trying to implement policy, and there is plenty of politics if you are not elected to office. if you are working in a private business or an ngo, that is the kind of politics i want to talk about. how do you have the skills to actually turn your ideas into actions. in every public service success, leadership requires the vision of a better future for the -- where the purpose of public service is made plain in the circumstances of the moment. a clear understandable plan to realize that vision, and the billing to implement -- ability to implement changes.
if at all possible by the , conclusion of all stakeholders in the process. this is becoming more important than ever before. in an independent world, whether we like it or not, inclusive politics is necessary to have inclusive economics. inclusive discussion with various stakeholders is necessary to effect positive social changes. asia has three interesting, very vigorous leaders at the moment. the president of china, who is trying to grow the chinese economy internally more by resuming population growth by modifying the one child policy, and trying to elevate some of -- eliminate some of the corruption that has been endemic to the system. the prime minister abe of japan is trying to overcome his own country by allowing widespread
immigration by putting more women in the workforce and enabling people to work longer. prime minister modi of india has written a book called, "inclusive politics, inclusive governments." he recognizes his country's big problem is it has grown like crazy. and around his prosperity centers, that is the case. but only 35% of the people are being reached by that effort. india needs to develop the ability to aggregate and employ capital so that 100% of the people have a chance to benefit from the enterprise that is now driving dramatic prosperity for just 35% of them. this inclusion issue is going to become bigger, and bigger, and bigger in the lifetime of the students who are here.
let me try to illustrate the success of leadership, and the pitfalls, with a few recent examples. recent in my terms, not the students. [laughter] helmut kohl was the chancellor of germany when the berlin wall came down. he had a vision. born of a lifetime of experience that included obviously living through world war ii. of a united, peaceful, and prosperous germany in the united democratic peaceful europe. both of these developments may seem normal to you. they were virtually unimaginable for most of european history. germany was not a separate country, but a collection of
city states and united under bismarck. herbert kohl became a second longest-serving chancellor of history, second only to bismarck. he had a strategy, which he pursued with extraordinary discipline. it was first, to unite germany after the wall came down, which required very large transfers of money from west to east germany to begin the long process of equalizing economic opportunities for both sides. second, to expand and strengthen the european union. he wanted all of central and eastern europe to come to the eu so germany would be in the middle of europe, not on the edge where it had been a source of instability and conflict throughout the 20th century.
third, he wanted to expand nato and strengthen the ties to the united states because he thought that was important to building a prosperous, democratic future for germans and the rest of europe. fourth, often forgotten he , became the most vigorous supporter of russia after the end of communism. it is economic recovery, democracy building, and increasing cooperation with the eu and the u.s. it is hard to believe, given the headlines today, that was the order we were trying to build in the 1990's, and it worked for quite a while. in the beginning it worked, very well, but there were two central problems with implementing his vision after he left office.
one is that much of the european union, although not every member, and they had a eurozone the currency, which was adopted before those in the eurozone had a common economic policy, a common social policy, and common public investment policy. which meant it worked great when europe was growing well, and greeks could borrow money at german interest rates, essentially. when the economy turned down, it no longer works very well, partly because the german voters did not understand how much gain they had gotten out of all of those good years when greece spain, portugal, and italy got to borrow money at common interest rates and buy german exports. germany is by the way still the number one rich country in the world in percentage of its gdp tied to exports and manufacturing.
no small measure, but a good lesson for the united states because of that it dramatic success involving middle-class businesses in the export market, having a continuous lifetime training program, and having a program that pays employers to keep people working, instead of paying unemployment benefits to unemployed employees. it works fine, but when greece failed, and ireland failed, and
spain had skyrocketing unemployment, all for slightly different reasons. basically it was just a real estate boom going bust in ireland and spain. portugal and italy had their own troubles. the automatic response of the eu was to try to impose austerity on greece because they had made promises they cannot keep. they had a country in which rich people did not pay taxes. constitutionally be shipping companies are expected -- exempted from taxes. so if you are a cab driver in athens, or a fisherman in the aegean, you felt like a chump if you did pay taxes. they started in 1999, their public debt was lower than it is today. the fundamental laws of economics has not been repealed. if inflation is lower than interest rates, there is insufficient demand, and more austerity will get you into a a dee deeper hole, not get you out
of it. that happened. there was no provision made at the creation of the eurozone for how to get out, without collapsing the wholhole, or without spooking the markets. that was probably an error. they should have made an exit strategy part of the beginning then the hazards would not have been so great. the typical thing for a little country in the kind of trouble greek is in is to do value and start trying to grow again. iceland did that. they are not in the euro zone. iceland had more self-made millionaires, mostly in tech and retail businesses than any other european country. they devalued and started
building again, and got out of this mess in a hurry. that does not mean that kohl's european idea was wrong. for many older europeans, even the boring and bureaucratic nature of the cumbersome machinery of brussels in the eu is a godsend. it is far better than the uncertainty of war. and endless injury -- intrigued with destructive consequences. the other thing that happened to his vision is that russia took a more unilateral and authoritarian turn, as manifest most vividly in what happened in the ukraine, and what continues to happen there. but, on balance you would have to say he was the most important
european leader since world war ii. because of the good things that happened, and the bad things that did not happen. i still believe, over the long run, we will return to the path that he advocated for so long. second example, the prime minister of singapore recently passed away at 91. i was asked along with henry kissinger, and representatives of the united states to preside at his funeral. i had known him and had a lot of contact with him. i went. when he took office more than 50 years ago in 1962, he was the leader of a small, city state of a few million people with a per capita income of under $1000 a year. it had recently broken off from malaysia.
there was a lot uncertainty about two things. one was whether this city state which was majority chinese, with a smaller, but still noticeable indian minority, and filipinos and others could make a go of it. and two, whether a state that small could withstand the debilitating consequences of the corruption which was then endemic to most of the rising asian countries. lee had a strategy. his vision was to have a prosperous, unified, secure nation. he knew that singapore had the most important thing of all at the time he came of age -- location. it was located at a critical juncture for all the major sea lanes.
you knew the asian economy was going to gboom, he wanted to be there. his strategy was to govern singapore on terms of equal treatment for all its citizens without regard to their ethnic background. there were 10 speakers at his funeral. his son, the prime minister, spoke first about his leadership. his second son spoke last about what a good father he was. in the middle, there were representatives of every ethnic group in singapore who talked about how he had made a home for them -- inclusion. he was rigorous in the pursuit of corruption from cabinet
ministers to overcharging people for fines. they got rid of corruption. in a singapore where people wanted to invest where people wanted to be. where everything was on the up and up. things were on the level. it made a huge difference. the third thing he wanted to do was to have an alliance with the united states for security purposes. but to get along with everybody in the neighborhood. which he proceeded to do. finally, he launched a constant organized effort to modernize the country educationally, technologically, and to maintain social cohesion. with methods we thought were pretty severe, including caning maldoers, but it worked.
i remember once there was a lot a joking in the press that singapore banning chewing gum. they got mad because kids were leaving th chewing down under desks and seat. s. but they got rid of the problem. they built one of the five best education systems in the world. they spent the same amount of money we spent to sequence the human genome. did it succeed? when he took office, it was under $1000. we celebrated his life, the cabinet income was $55,000.
one of the most remarkable economic success stories ever.ernesto became sort of an accidental president of mexico . the person his party favorite favored was killed early in his presidency. he was a well trained economist. he wanted to build a modern economy from mexico and a modern political nation. that was his vision. so he set about building a modern economy by opening mexico to competition and investment and promoting responsible, more honest behavior. early in this effort, through no fault of his own they had a horrible economic crisis.
they were about to go broke, and the united states stepped in. that was 20 years ago. we stepped in and gave him a loan, which on the day i give it, was opposed by 80% of the american people. we thought about mexico's yesterday instead of tomorrow. it was one of the best investments we ever made. we still have disagreements with mexico, but think about your own life. it is one thing to have a disagreement with a friend, and another to have a disagreement with an adversary. the consequences are dramatically different. he recognized his country could never become fully modern unless it was more politically competitive. he opened the field of competition. had an honest election. it was won by the cente fox, and
he handed over power peacefully to a member of the opposite party. did it work? mexico is not free of problems, but it is worth noting that one of his successors built 140 tuition-free universities and last year graduated engineers. the economic growth was sufficient to keep mexicans home between 2010 and 2014 for the first time in my lifetime. there was no net in migration in mexico. nelson mandela's vision was to build a modern democratic state that would survive and thrive after the end of apartheid and the end of his term. his strategy included his now famous reconciliation
commission, where people who had committed crimes, even murderous crimes during the apartheid era could come and testify and make their actions a part of the public record, and then be reconciled to the rest of the country so they can participate in the future. it was an astonishing thing. we do not have time to build any more jails and worry about this. we have to go forward. something that was copied largely in a slightly different form, through local courts in rwanda after the rwanda genocide. and in a capacity that was beyond the culture of many other countries. interestingly enough, we are now seeing the ongoing efforts to of the president of col ombia, president santos, to resolve the last remaining
conflicts there. the big hangup is who is going to be held responsible for what. this is something we all have to deal with in our lives, and we have to with in other cultures. but accountability is important but so is going beyond. and different people, different cultures go about it in different ways. but there is no doubt in my mind that mandela did the right thing for south africa. the second thing he did, which was arguably just as important was practice the politics of radical inclusion. that to most of us, was symbolized when he invited his jailers to his inauguration. but far more important is that he put the leaders of the parties that supported apartheid in his cabinet. you think, well, that happens
all the time, national unity governments. mandela ran for president with 18 opponents and got 63% of the vote. the first time black south africans had voted in 300 years. his whole term occurred when i was president. so we did a lot of business together. i always let him call me late at night because of the time difference. he liked to go to bed early, and he knew i would stay up late, so he would call me late at night. he called me late one night and they said, "oh, they are giving me hell." and i said, "who?" he said, "no, my own people." i said how can you put these people in the government.
you won 63% of the boat. -- 63% of the vote. now you're giving them government ministries. i said what did you tell them? he said, "we just voted for the first time in 300 years. can we run the financial system, the military, the police all by ourselves? is there one thing in this whole country we can run all by ourselves? the answer is no, maybe someday. he said we can do this together." you would be surprised if somebody gave a speech like that in washington, wouldn't you? [laughter] president clinton: it is important to recognize -- not to be too thing to money is here -- nelson mandela had paid a remarkable price and learned astonishing lessons, and he had
the stature to do that and not fall. there was a third and often overlooked part of his strategy which is why it hasn't worked out yet. he named as his deputy president a much younger man, who was the most gifted economist in south africa. he knew it would take his entire term and he was determined to serve only one term. he was already into his 70's, and he paid a stiff physical price from being in prison. he increased trade and investment across africa in a ways that would stabilize -- in a way that would stabilize south africa. that part of the plan did not work. for reasons beyond his control.
south africa first became the epicenter of the world's aids crisis. and was made worse by the troubles in zimbabwe and other places that lead to even more people coming into south africa who were hiv positive. meanwhile, and still to me somewhat mystifying, mbeke denied the nature and dimensions that caused the remedies of the crisis. i knew this because our foundation help to them to come up with an aids plan and they were doing fine in the cities. they had prosperous cities with great health systems. but they had to get out into the countryside, and when we celebrated -- i cannot remember -- maybe nelson mandela's 80th birthday, i was down there bank
and we had 50 people who worked without health access initiative dressed up and ready to go to south africa to implement a plan that the governor and the cabinet had adopted, and it all was canceled. it was a bizarre story of local politics gone awry. the third most important person in south africa's political hierarchy, after the president is the treasurer of the african national congress because he funds all their political operations, and it was effectively a one-party dominance state. his wife was a health minister. she had been trained in a position in the old soviet union, and she thought that aids was sort of a western plot to make pharmaceutical companies more money. and said all this could be cured by native roots and yams.
sounds crazy now, but they believed that. and mbeke felt perhaps accurately, that he could not let her go and stay in power. the point is, another thing to remember, whatever you do -- mbe ke took office intending to build a modern economic state. he was gifted enough to do it. he knew enough to do it. what he did not deal well with the incoming fire -- but he did not deal well with the incoming fire. when something happens that you did not intend to happen aids explodes. i always say when president bush and al gore ran for president in 2000, nobody asked either one of them what are you going to do
when the twin towers are blown up, the pentagon is attacked and another plane crashes in pennsylvania? you cannot say, i'm sorry, you cannot do that. it is important to remember not just in politics but in everything. there will always be something that happened that you are not planning for peer you have to deal with that and pursue your original vision at the same time. but mandela still deserves history's applause because south africa is still a democracy. it is still operating still doing a lot of good. the current president, who has his own problem, has been great dealing with aids, really great. and mandela proved that inclusion is better than constant conflict.
so i think all of that worked. let's talk about some nonstate actors. the woman responsible for creating the greenbelt in kenya that she died in 2009. she knew that the kenyan tree cover was eroding the topsoil and destroying agricultural productivity. it was going to cause endless political conflicts in the country. fuel corruption. she had a vision of repairing that damage so that kenya could take its considerable other strength and grow in a way that produced broad-based prosperity.
but what she won the nobel prize for was figuring out, i need to figure out something everybody can do to advance this nation, and i do not just need to be in parliament to advocate these changes. i need to a do something to involve everyone. she got thousands and thousands of people to produce tens of millions of trees, single-handedly from the grassroots up. she began to try to reverse a debilitating trend, without which -- that we are still working on today. so her vision as a citizen organizing and ngo she did not have the power to do it herself. but now the government supported policies finally that are allowing us to map the country and plan in a strategic way to do things. they asked my foundation to go there because of my long
friendship with her and what we had done. but that is a way to look at her life and say she made a real difference, and she did it by empowering individual people to do something simple and doing it on a scale that would catch the attention of the world. i will give you another example. a republican american businessman, now sadly passed away a few years ago. in the early 1960's, ken iversen founded a new company called nucor. it was a steel company. his vision was to make steel not in an original casting the way it was likely done in and around pittsburgh but by melting down existing steel and reforming it. the technology was developed so
the steel could then be rolled in one-inch thick rolls instead of four-inch thick rolls, making it much more malleable and suitable for a variety of purposes. that is not the important thing. iversen decided that if he wanted his company to last a long run and be able to adapt that 40% of their success would be rooted in their technology, and 60% in their people. so he adopted the most radical egalitarian culture of any company of which i am aware in america. and the reason i know this is i recruited the company to arkansas, and i liked him, and i am pretty sure he never voted for me because he was a really conservative republican. he did not want the government
to tell him to do this, but this was a communitarian's dream what he did. when he let the steel mills in america, they had no corporate headquarters. they rented office space in an office park in charlotte, north carolina. they had a grand total of 22 people in the central office, with 11 steel mills. the workers were paid a salary that averaged 65% of to 75% of the national average, but they got a bonus weekly. in addition to that, there was a profit sharing plan of 10% of the profits unavailable to top management. everybody else participated. in addition to that, if you had a child who wanted to go to
college, they would pay the equivalent of a year's tuition of community college for a child who wanted to go. one man educated eight children working for nucor and it had no adverse effect on your pay or your bonus. in addition to that, they had a no-layoff policy. so i have still got the letter can iversen -- i have still got the letter can iversen wrote. they never lost money until the financial crisis. but their profit margin went down. so he sent a letter which said something like this -- "as you know the world's steel businesses are in a terrible slum, so our sales went down 20% this year.
-- are in a terrible slump, so our sales went down 20% this year. it is not your fault. it is, however, my fault. as you know, i have a no-layoff policy, so everybody's income is going down 20% this year. but since it is my fault and not yours, i'm going to cut my income 60%. there was a big article in "fortune" and "forbes," talking about how he was by light years the lowest fortune 500 paid -- the lowest paid fortune 500 ceo in america. he wore it like a badge of honor. he said i could go down the streets where the corporate offices are, and i can watch them go to work and look at them for five minutes at their desk and tell you whether that company is succeeding or not. he said i do not want short-term
investors in nucor. they want somebody to turn a quick profit, they should look somewhere else. we are in it for the long run. it is very interesting to see. he had a very inclusive process. there were only three management layers below him and the employee making the steel. and every employee had the president's phone number and his. you could call him on the phone but only if you would talk to your supervisor first. the point is, he created a culture of radical inclusion and it works and it is working today. they have the same culture today, except now the education benefit is higher. if you have a spouse who wants to go to college, your spouse is eligible. if you want to go after work,
you can go. none of it takes a penny away from your wages or your bonus. so i would say that guy is a success. from the time i became president, nucor was the third biggest steel company in america. he did it with a vision, with a plan with execution, and radical inclusion. and i will give you another example. bill and melinda gates -- they have a simple vision. their vision is that every life has equal value and therefore we should create a world where people have equal chances. that is their vision. simple. they have a strategy. we got a lot of money and we are going to invest it to achieve their that vision, but we will
invest it in people who can do things that we cannot do. for example, melinda gates -- hillary recently announced the four she left the foundation that they were going to go over data research they had done on the condition of women and the disparities and conditions of women and men in the united states and around the world. bill gates and bill gates foundation invests a lot of money every year through our health access initiative to solve problems. and i love the way he is just totally iconoclastic. he wants to do what works. he said to me a few years ago, " the world should not need what you do. the world health organization ought to be able to do this, but it cannot. so we do it."
but it is very interesting to watch how a person -- if you listen to him, he will say we find it harder to give this money away than it was to make it because our goal is simple and clear. we want to create a world of equal chances. and i think they had been most successful in their health investments around the world where the millennium development goals had been exceeded in any number of measurements. i will give you one other example. i recently went to haiti, where i had been working for many years, to visit project i supported, on the grounds of the oldest aids clinic in the world. the first its clinic in the world established in port-au-prince haiti, by a doctor named bill papp, a native
of port-au-prince. the city was built for 200,000 people and now 3 million live there. 100,000 people just live in what should be out in the water. this makes the possibility of waterborne diseases much more likely, and that is what cholera turned out to be. it basically entered the water stream in haiti because the country does not have good super and water systems. so bill papp -- good sewer and water systems. so bill papp build a modern cholera treatment center. this guy spent his whole life treating aids, and then when the
earthquake occurred, all the land he had around this little hospital, he gave over to the city. but he realized that cholera could be just as debilitating to his country, so he designed a hospital to maximize the success of treatment maximum sanitation, no infections, and he treated the water and the sanitation above the ground, who because of the characteristics i just described. he developed this absolutely beautiful treatment system covered in plants and greenery which got 99% of the bacteria out of the waste system, and then they covered it with chlorine and got up to 99% before it could ever be released into the ground. this one man in one place doing
something at an affordable price that could be scaled and could save countless lives around the world. paul farmer, my friend on the board of our health programs, founded partners in health with the head of the world bank, and he figured out how to serve in the area of 200,000 with a health staff that would normally serve only 20,000, by building one good hospital and then satellite clinics, and beyond the satellite, trained community medical workers. and then he went to rwanda at our request and worked with our foundation and built a hospital and every week they had all been destroyed except the one during the capital city during the genocide.
the last hospital is near the ugandan border, and the only cancer treatment center in that part of africa. but they are all the same thing -- a simple system that can be affordable and repeated by countries at income levels way below ours. if you have a vision, a strategy , and you have the support of people at the grassroots level because you are inclusive, these kinds of things can be done by ordinary citizens. these are things we need to be thinking about in america if we want broad-based prosperity. as we work to define our role in the world competition from new and different sources to define the future. arguably, the most interesting nongovernmental organization
today -- which proves the importance of inclusion by its shortcomings but is formidable -- is isis. isis is a terrorist organization an ngo, trying to become a state. that is, they do not recognize any of the boundaries of middle eastern countries as legitimate. they were largely established by westerners after the collapse of the ottoman empire in world war i. when they go capture a place, they set up their own judicial system, their own rulemaking. they set up wherever their social services are going to be. the only thing is, you cannot disagree with them or they will kill you, as we have seen. sometimes they kill you -- they will allow, just as the ottomans
did -- they will allow a christian or a june 2 to live if they agree to pay a fine or a tax every year to live within their hallowed kingdom. but if they decide you are an apostate, they just kill you, which is why they authorize the killing of other muslims and why they went after that tiny sect who were totally powerless because they viewed them as inherently apostate. it is the only book i am going to recommend today, a fascinating book written on the minority religions of the middle east, by a retired british military -- there are still 200,000 samaritans there.
surely there is a good samaritan . it is fascinating. but the point is, isis is the opposite. they have a vision, they have a strategy. they think they are right. but they are anti-inclusion in the extreme and people are voting with their feet, as you see. it will not be the future, but it cannot be ignored. it has to be countered. so, as america charts its course in the world and tries to restore broad-based posterity -- broad-based prosperity, it is well to remember that we need to
make our purpose is clear with a vision that is inclusive of our own people, and also gives other people a chance to be part of constructive rather than destructive partnerships. for me personally, i have always had a pretty simple purpose. i always wanted, at the end of my life, to be able to answer with a resounding yes three questions -- our people better off and you quit than when you started? do children have a brighter future? are things coming together instead of being torn apart? to me, all the rest is background music. and i tried to develop the political skills and the ability
to constantly develop policy that would enable me personally to say that. which meant that given times if i had a different vision than what my country would do at that point in time or my state had to do at that time -- all of you had to do that. when i was a student here -- and i quoted this in 1992 when i gave my lecture before i started my campaign -- i was deeply moved by carroll quigley's statement in "the history of civilizations," the defining characteristic of our civilization was the simple belief that the future could be better than the past and every person had a moral responsibility to contribute to making it better. that no one had the truth, so
the great joy in life was the constant search for the truth. it was a journey that gave life dignity and meeting -- dignity and meaning. so i cannot tell you what your purpose should be. but i can tell you you will have a lot more fun in your life if you have one, and if it is bigger than you. a couple of years ago, right as the annual meeting of our global initiative was beginning, i was notified that a young woman who worked for our health access initiative in mozambique and her fiance, a gifted architect, had been among those murdered by our shal shahab in the attack on a
mall in nairobi. she was a dutch nurse. ironically, in all these years i have been doing this around the world, we have only lost two people to violence, and they were both such nurses. she was so good at what she did, she took time off from working for us, went back to harvard, got a phd in public health, and came back to take a management position in africa. her name was ella. she was 8 1/2 months pregnant. she went to nairobi because it is the base place -- the best place in that part of africa to have a baby. she and her husband were just strolling down a wall and they were killed. the people that killed her doubtless think they are righteous people, but if you believe in an inclusive future
in it interdependent world, it does not belong to them. nigeria has a new president because a majority of people in nigeria do not like boko haram. they do not think you have the right to kill everybody you disagree with. so anyway, when i was at the global initiative, i was very moved by this because i had been with that woman six weeks before she was murdered. visiting our projects. and she was beautiful and very pregnant. i said i am a father. if you have an emergency, just call me if play. we were joking and having fun. six weeks later, she was gone. none of us know how long we are going to be here and what we are going to do.
but her life had purpose because she had a vision and she developed a personal strategy to make a difference, which she did. so i told this story. that i just told you. when i told the story, another woman came up to me and said, you know, more than 20 years ago i was that young nurse. i was in kenya, i was working. in africa, in an ngo. and i went to nairobi to have my baby. my baby was born healthy, and i was blessed. but a few years ago he was shot several times in the virginia tech shooting. and she said, thank god he lived , and it changed his whole life. and all he wants to do now
>> mr. president, the students have submitted some really excellent questions that are , i think, very stimulating. but the first one is a softball. i cannot let you take too long on that. it will be great fun, i think. it is the teacher in me. [laughter] what does going to georgetown mean to you? how does it influence your purpose? president clinton: i will try to give a short answer. i think i told you this before. when i wrote my other biography, -- when i wrote my autobiography, my editor made me take out 20 pages i wrote about georgetown. there is still a lot in there. they say, you cannot possibly remember all these people and
teachers. but i do. it had a profound impact on me because i met people from all over the world, both my teachers and my fellow students that i never would have met otherwise. our class was the only graduating class i think in american history that produced three presidents in three countries. when i became president, my classmate was the president of el salvador. when i left office, a classmate was the president of the philippines. the whole time i was there, our classmate was ambassador of the united kingdom. i was here at a fascinating time. but it affected me mostly because of the teachers i had.
and the people i went to school with and the conversations we had about what was going on in our classes. and the debates we had. it is very different from now. in my class, we did not have an elective course until the second semester of our junior year. big controversy. but i loved it. i doubt very seriously if i ever would have become president, had i not come to georgetown. i'm certain i would not have done whatever good i did done. -- whatever good i did do. i would have done it less well if i had not been here. >> thank you. this is from a sophomore in the college. where do you see this generation of young adults going? in what way is our path going to be different than before?
president clinton: what has happened in technology yesterday will look like child's play over the next 20 to 30 years. i think most of you will live to be 90 years old or more unless some accident befalls you or have an environmentally caused cancer and we do not know how to treat you. i think that you will live in a time where the technological revolution will extend to artificial intelligence and we can do the things we have not been able to do before. i think the combination and the of nanotechnology improvements and the continuing plumbing of
the mysteries of the genome will lead us to have affordable, four times a year health exams that will involve going into a canister and being scanned. one of the biggest debates in medicine in 20 years will be for example, since we all have cancerous cells in our body all the time and most of us -- most of them are just destroyed by the operations of our body, one of the great questions will be, we can see this submicroscopic tumor. should we zap it out now or do it later? your life will be dramatically different. i believe you will begin in one final chance to figure out how to avoid the most calamitous consequences of climate change, and i think it there will be more economically beneficial ways to do it than now. i think you will have to worry
about water. i think water is a canary in the coal mine. i think you have to worry about how to feed billions of people. the one thing that slows down the birthright across all ages and cultures is education of women and economic development of the poor. so i think you live in an exciting time. i think that it is unlikely that these ideologically driven conflicts we are having now with nonstate actors will be fully resolved. i hope and pray that we will leave behind a system where we can say with some confidence that we can keep really bad things from happening. that is why this negotiation with iran is so important.
maybe for reasons that have not in much in the press. for example, if they get a bomb, then there are four or five arab countries that can afford them. you have six more people with nuclear capacity, there if you have a . if you have a bomb that you can use, you have to have access to some material. any country that uses a big bomb knows it can be annihilated. but the material is not considered a minor miracle of the modern world. the stocks of pakistan, as far as we know, even though the technology was given to north korea and others -- as far as we know, the materials have not been stolen, sold, or given away. i think you will have to worry
about all that. but i believe that you will live longer, have more options, and you will -- we will probably not have fully resolved the problem between growing productivity and adequate employment. but i do think we will do a better job -- you are raising your own kids and living your your own lives. we will more fairly apportion the wealth we are creating. there will be more shared prosperity. but when nobody can tell you is -- but what nobody can tell you is, when the changes are so rapid, we will not be able to create an employment to keep the populace employed. we will have to think about something if that happens. think about some radical changes
in the arrangement of labor and capital. carlos slim said the other day -- and he is pretty smart -- that he thought that some time in this new century, we would be down to a three-day work week just because of the breathtaking increases in productivity. if so have at it. >> this may be the easiest question or the toughest. what was your most difficult decision as president or otherwise? we can pass that on if you want. president clinton: the ones that i had to make echo interestingly enough, they were not the ones that were most politically unpopular. like i said, 80% of the people were against what i did mexico. easy decision. 74% of the people were against
my first act in the presidential arena, putting together a big aid package for russia. they were so poor. a majority was against what i did in bosnia when we started. the most difficult decisions were my version of dealing with the age crisis -- dealing with the aids crisis. first, i thought trickle-down economics were wrong. ordinary people were not benefiting at all. poverty had gone up. wages were stagnant.
i wanted to give the middle class a tax cut. right before i was elected, the government said, either way, the deficit is going to be twice as big as we told you it was. by the way. so i had two choices. i could play like it did not happen and i could go ahead and present my original plan. or go back to the core strategy which was to get america growing again. we had to bring interest rates down. we had a normal economy -- that is, inflation and interest rates were getting high, and it was going to drive -- my gamble was if i could get interest rates down, there would be a huge amount of private investment, which would overcome the contractionary impact of the economic plan i presented, which called for both spending cuts and tax increases. but i hated to give up something that i really wanted to provide
and i had to choose that were doubling the earned income tax credit, which benefited primarily lower income workers, who had children. and i just do not think a society as rich as ours should allow anybody to have kids in the house and work full-time and still be in poverty. i just think that is wrong. so i did it. all i heard for two years was he broke his promise on the middle class tax cut. lowering mortgage rates, college rates. when we passed the balance budget bill -- that was a hard decision. it was hard for me not to act alone in bosnia. we all knew what serbia was doing in bosnia, and by then, secretary of state warren
christopher asked them to help in europe, and they did not want to do it for a thousand reasons why. i decided i should not do that because it would. the sustainable -- because it would not be sustainable. the europeans had to buy in. they had to own the fact that if they wanted a europe that was united democratic, and free for the first time in history, the balkans were going to be part of it. and so i waited until we could get a unified response. but it was a painful way to let people down in that way. some of the decisions that i regret most were not hard. but were wrong. we did not even talk seriously about whether we should send troops to rwanda because the
public was exhausted with what happened with black hawk down in somalia and because we were involved in bosnia and that was much more in the news. frankly, we had no idea it could kill 10% of the country in 90 days, essentially. so sometimes the things you regret were not hard at the time and should have been a little harder. i will always regret we did not have a long, drawnout debate on it. we did not really discuss it. and i spent my life trying to make it up to the rwanda's. -- to the rwandans. i am working at it. >> early on, you committed yourself to public service, and you outlined your fundamental purpose. a vocational commitment like that, you kind of go through
your time where you really question it and say what am i doing here? president clinton: well, i dated a couple of times when i was governor. i was governor a long time. at least i've proved i could hold down a job. i served a very long time, and people of my native state were good enough to elect me five times. based on recent events, i do not know if i could win again. so there were times when i just got burned out, you know. but i never wanted -- i would always find something new to do and i told people one of the reasons i love being in public life, it was like peeling an onion that had no end.
there was always another layer something new and interesting something to engage the imagination, stretch your capacity. so i did not. and when -- when the congress and the press were all on that whitewater business, i knew it was not on the level and that there was nothing to it. i had invested in a land deal and lost money. the guy later went into the s&l business and failed. it was a made up deal. it was heartbreaking to me to see otherwise sensible people treated like it was something but it never made me want to quit. i was raised -- i had an unusual
upbringing, but i was raised not to quit. we are not big on quitting in my family. you may have noticed that. [laughter] president clinton: so it was awful, but i learned to kind of just wall it off. and i think -- i also felt that maybe this was arrogant and i should not have felt that way -- but i spent a lot of time when i was president reading the history of other presidents, including not well-known presidents. and i realized that the success of a given president is first determined by the time in which he lived.
washington was going to be a great president or a flop depending on whether or not he was going to be a king or keep the democracy. he was a great president and he made really good decisions on the big things. lincoln became president when the whole question was whether the union would survive or not. a lot of people thought it would not. a lot of people thought the south had more talented generals and we would not hang around, the union would not hang around long enough. roosevelt had the depression and world war ii. but it also depends on whether the skills and the psychology of a person in a given leadership position -- this is not just politics -- actually fit well with the challenges of that particular moment. when i read all of these histories of the lesser-known
presidents, some of them were suited to govern when they did, and others had not -- would not be as successful had they not governed in the time that they did. a lot of people think franklin pierce was one of the worst presidents we ever had. if you measure that because he was elected right before the civil war and he could not stop the country's drift toward war or stop the spread of slavery and this and that, that is absolutely true. but he was an immensely successful soldier in the mexican war. he was a successful member of congress, went home and became the governor of new hampshire, only other governor of a small state to be elected president. he was on his way to be inaugurated with his only child. presidents were then inaugurated in march, and he took a train down to washington. on the way, there was a train
wreck. nobody was hurt very bad. there were a couple of bones except his 11-year-old son fell on his neck and snapped it and died. nobody else got anything but a broken bone. that is how he started his presidency, with his wife starting out in a catatonic state of grief. i am not sure it was in the cards for anybody to succeed before the country split apart. that is what i think about. but by and large, i think when you get tired, you want to bag it unless you are old and you think i have three years left and you want to spend it doing something else, you ought to hang in there and work through it.
you ought to go, somebody will push you out one way or the other. but you ought not to open the door if you think your vision is not -- i am not big on quitting. i would rather hang around, and if you need to go somebody will kick you out. >> mr. president, we are allowed one warp question -- one more question. you are obviously very well read. if you had to recommend one book, what would it be? that is all you get. you mentioned one earlier. president clinton: "the meditations of marcus are really us." -- the meditations of marcus are really us." >> he did it. [laughter and applause] thank you. i really appreciate it. i really appreciate it.
talking about the link between trade and exports and national security. at 2:00 eastern, the farewell ceremony for attorney general eric holder. he will deliver remarks to justice import -- just -- to justice department employees. mark noller of cbs tweets this afternoon that loretta lynch just past yesterday was sworn in by vice president biden. the farewell ceremony coming at 2:00, live on c-span. >> during this month, c-span is pleased to present the winning entries in this year's studentcam video documentary competition. studentcam is c-span's annual competition that encourages middle and high school students to think critically about issues that affect the nation. students are asked to create their documentaries based on the theme "the three branches and you," to demonstrate how a policy, law, or action by one of the three branches of government has affected them or their community.
severiano romo, alexis rainery, and molly kerwick from metropolitan arts institute in phoenix, arizona are one of our first prize winners. their entry focused on the individuals with disabilities education act. >> the discrimination of people with disabilities are is something we have all experienced in our own personal lives. prior to the individuals with disabilities education act, or the i.d.e.a., students with disabilities were not given an education. ms. romo: you would not give are you down syndrome or disability like that. ms. runfola: the doctors told us he should be institutionalized which is what they did in those days, and she, being a nurse said no, that is not going to
happen. mr. wendorf: students with disabilities are protected class and deserve a level of support both in instruction and another ways that go beyond the needs of their nondisabled peers. >> when it was time to go to schools, the schools were by law supposed to take the children in but they , resisted. they do not have a special ed classes. when you learn how to read and write. >> the i.d.e.a. is a federal law that ensures students with disabilities are provided a free, appropriate, public education, achieved through services catered to their specific needs. >> i.d.e.a. helps the state work with schools across arizona to make sure that we do everything we can to deliver special services to students who need them.
in arizona, we serve about 129,000 students through i.d.e.a. out of a total school population of about 1.1 million. >> the i.d.e.a. is important to me because i have a sibling who has down syndrome, so her entire education is formed around the i.d.e.a. molly kerwick: i am a part of that community of children with the special education. mr. wendorf: there is a vital role that it plays. it is especially vital for students with disabilities. mr. johnson: as many of the resources we can help them acquire in order to provide the differentiated services to students. >> my job is 100% driven by i.d.e.a., how i service students, what their services
book light best look like, their paperwork looks like, are they being provided with a free appropriate public education and are they being taught in the least restrictive environment? >> both special education and general education students enjoy life skills from being in a similar environment. this inclusion provides benefits to all students. >> people with intellectual disabilities tend to need to have things shortened up and more direct, and i have naturally seen that the students get that. >> for the typically developing students or what we refer to as general education students, they developed a lot of important interpersonal skills. they are more patient, more accepting less prejudiced, they , are able to appreciate the diversity of human relationships and the skills that we all bring.
>> it is very important vest or ends are fully included in the classroom, they are being fully accepted by their peers and the whole classroom environment. severiano romo: i think a lot of that was because she was properly included. she was getting modified curriculum those relevant to what was going on the classroom. she felt like she was doing the work that the other kids were doing, and in doing so, she's out part of the class, a part of the experience that school should be. >> people with intellectual disabilities are now being included in gened classes. it is a fairly new development when you look at the grand scheme of things, and it is not surprising that a lot of people do not know much about how to go about doing it. >> my sister has down syndrome she is seven years old, and in her old school, she did not have special education classes, so she was just with everybody
else, and she loved it. >> we find they are able to develop stronger communication skills, stronger interpersonal communication skills. we know that they display fewer inappropriate behaviors, and there more often likely to interact with their peers. molly kerwick: now she is at a new school that has special education programs, she is not included in general education classes. she is learning more, but she does not like school. i would say it is kind of disappointing. >> the problem that i am seeing is more with gened teachers, and they will be the first to admit it. they do not know about it teaching a person with disability. mr. johnson: a time for them to be more educated and to service such lead students in their
classrooms better. >> it is a humanitarian issue. ♪ a lack of proper inclusion perpetrates the segregation between typically developing students and students with disabilities and can lead to harmful prejudice. mr. wendorf: i.d.e.a. is a civil rights law. >> i think the i.d.e.a. has been executed well in the classroom. i also think there is room for improvement. >> special education is light years ahead. today they have so much more available. >> services to students with disabilities have improved
exponentially. including children with disabilities in a classroom help them combat stereotypes that may develop at an early age. the more that children with disabilities are included in school, the easier it is for them to integrate it into society as an adult with a disability. >> to learn more about our competition and to watch all of the winning videos, go to c-span.org and click on "studentcam's." also, tell us what you think on facebook and twitter. >> coming up shortly, national security and finally susan rice speaking to the export import bank conference. this is scheduled for 1:15 p.m., it could happen earlier. we will have a line when it comes underway. the importance of u.s. businesses getting loans from the xm export import bank.
here are his comments. [applause] >> good morning. welcome once again to the 2015 export import bank annual conference. april 23, 1910. exactly 105 years ago. teddy roosevelt traveled to paris to deliver a message to the world about the character of the american people. roosevelt had just finished his presidency, and they invited him to reflect on his time in office. they wanted to hear from him what he thought such americans apart, and he delivered one of
the most iconic speeches in our history, and one which i think perfectly captures the americans the spirit. he said it is not the critics who cap, the credit belongs to the person was actually in the arena. who strives valiantly, who knows the triumph of high achievement and if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly. there is something uniquely american about risk-taking but that's about striving for new frontiers, about failing getting up again, dusting herself up and getting in the saddle. very few culturist value that. that is something that truly separates the american spirit from the rest of the world. to put it simply, what teddy
roosevelt meant was, that success belongs to those who show up. who are not afraid to take on a risk, and step into the arena. look around this room. what do you see? i see entrepreneurs, icy innovators i see mainstream buyers who count on your equality to buy goods and services. icy job creators. i see lots of job creators. the thing about those pesky job creators is that they always show up. every time i visit a small business every time i meet an entrepreneur who uses our working capital to hire more employees, every time i speak to a group like this: people who use exim products to take a
foreign creditors, icy job creators. that is who shows up, that is who is in the arena. america faces a choice today. whether it will continue to engage in the arena global competition, or whether it will retreat. it is not easy going up against russia or china for the export sales. you know how tough it is out there. you're an american business looking to grow overseas sales, you want to contend with a lot of uncertainty. the dollar has risen to new heights. the price of oil has dropped to startling lows. new multilateral institutions we correct all of this speech is available online.
we now take you to the exim conference in washington. >> let me give you a little more information about exim which leads into our speaker. we went to look into our authorizations and last year 70%, a full 70% of the work we did, the financing we did was in the developing world. and the fact reminds me that i had dinner once with susan rice, and i said we weren't export agency, and she said we were in development agency. she was right, i was wrong. this summer president obama convenes an african leaders conference. he brought his ministers of african business, government officials, it was a two day event. at the close of that, the president singled out one
exporter who he thought represented the best of american entrepreneurship and the african export market. let's see what he had to say. obama: he was born in kenya. his family was originally from india, eventually she evergreen into the united states and started a small business in california. he started as a small engineering fair, and then it started to manufacture small power generators. with the help of export import bank including seminars in a line of credit and risk insurance, they started to export are generated to west africa. i had just to be hermeet her backstage. stand up. [applause] thank you so much. she is an example what is possible. so let's follow her lead. [applause]
>> how many people get to be introduced by the president of the united states? that is something we all aspire to, i only know one woman who has and loving regard to the stage. [applause] -- let me bring her to the state. [applause] ambassador rice: thank you so much. it is an honor and a privilege for me to be here this afternoon and to welcome you all to our keynote speech. that was an amazing moment that was made possible last year through the outcome of the u.s. import export rate. my name is consumekasum, and
my husband and i decided to start our business in corona california. today we are in engineering and manufacturing company that specializes in power generation systems and epc work. with the help of the export import bank of a we have been able to grow our business create jobs, and support global projects. in fact, today we also brought our customers, guests from nigeria, to be the first time attendees to the conference. we are completing -- [applause] we have recently completed in anyd an 80 megawatt power generation system, along with
other power plants in sub-saharan africa. africa is very important to our strategy, it is important because we know that groups lies there, and most importantly, both my husband and i were born in africa. [applause] again, it is an honor for me to introduce this year's esteemed keynote speaker, white house national security adviser susan rice . ambassador rice was previously a number of obama's cabinet. her experience in for policy allows her to bring a global perspective to our discussions about u.s. exporting, and i am just so thrilled and cited to have this opportunity. please join me in welcoming ambassador susan rice.
[applause] ambassador rice: good afternoon everyone. it is great to be with you. obviously want to begin by thanking kasum. i cannot replicate the wonderful introduction of president obama i thank you for being kind enough to introduce me. your story is a truly powerful testament to the drive and ingenuity of american small business owners, and how the export import bank facilitates connections and commerce that lift up our world. i want to thank my friend fred, not only for his invitation today, but for his outstanding leadership of exim. you have held the reins through a challenging time, and
throughout it all, exim has provided critical support to help get the global economy back on track, and indeed to help spur global development. so thank you very much. [applause] president obama has made promoting prosperity's top domestic priority, and hea key color of our national strategy. even as we praise challenges from countering terrorist threats to preventing the spread of nuclear weapons, take climate change -- to combating climate change who we are promoting prosperity around the world. of course president obama is not by no means the first
american to emphasize the connection between a strong economy and a strong foreign policy. during the depression president roosevelt proclaimed that americans full and permanent domestic recovery depends in part on a revised and strengthened international trade. after world war ii resident truman noted that, "peace freedom and world trade are inseparable. " today, once again confronted with the changing world, i would like to lay out how the obama administration draws on america's economic strength to bolster our national security and prepare for the challenges of the future. first, we are expanding economic opportunity starting with american workers. we are now in the midst of the longest streak of private sector drop growth -- job growth on
record. businesses have added more than 12 million new jobs. we have brought unemployment from a high of 10% in 2009, 25.5% today. -- to 5.5% today. [applause] ambassador rice: and critically, wages are on the rise again. this is linked to roma international commerce. that is why president obama launched the international export initiative in 2010, to help american companies reach overseas markets and create new jobs. and it is working. since 2009 experts admit death exports have made up one third of our growth.
they make of 11 million american jobs and those jobs pay up to 18% more than non-export related jobs. we are also incurred in foreign investment into the united states. business leaders already recognize that the united states is the best place to locate, in nvest and hire. we have cut red tape, and help generate more than $20 billion in job growth. that is good investment, but there are more market waiting to be tapped. that is why this is so essential. last year financing from the bank helps thousands of american entrepreneurs reach new markets and grow their small businesses. it supported 154,000
private-sector american jobs. and it did not cost the american taxpayer one cent, not one. in fact, exim returned $665 million to the american treasury. [applause] that is the very definition of win-win. i can tell you, when president obama meets with foreign leaders, exim is a very important part of our diplomacy. so i joined the president members of congress from both parties, the american chamber of co commerce, and small business owners across the country and calling on congress to reauthorize the exim with a long-term mandate to continue with my and vital work.
[applause] ambassador rice: today we are pursuing a most ambitious trade agenda in history. we are working with congress to secure support for a critical piece of legislation. the bipartisan congressional trade priorities, and accountability act. this bill will help us finalize the transpacific partnership, and the transatlantic trade and investment partnership. and ultimately, to create a free trade zone that encompasses two thirds of the global economy. with the united states and it's very center. with this legislation, congress does not see any power to have the final word on trade agreements. rather, it sets the parameters for a deal of press.
-- press. a deal to protect american workers, protect little property -- intellectual property. in short it gives us be leveraged to bring home the best possible agreements. and that brings me to a second way we promote prosperity. increased trade and investment is good for the global economy but to realize its full potential, everyone has to play by the same rules. by 2030, two thirds of the world middle-class, more than 3 billion people, will live and work and by asia. to sustain america's growth, we need to be part of those markets. so we are working hard to finalize the transpacific ownership and break down trade
barriers across the dynamic asia-pacific reason -- region. at the same time, through tpp we will ensure that american businesses and compete on a level playing field. we will protect access to shared spaces like the internet, the seas, and the sky, so that goods, people, and ideas can move more freely across the region. and we will raise the bar on global trade, enshrining the high standards and enforceable protections that americans expect. our economic relationship with europe is already the largest in the world. we conduct $1 trillion in annual two-way trade, invest $4 trillion in each other's economies, and support jobs for millions of americans and european workers. the transatlantic trade and
investment partnership will lose all of those numbers. and if we align the rules that govern commerce on both sides of the atlantic, we will effectively set the standard for commerce around the world. these agreements will secure real economic benefits for the american middle class and advance american global leadership. our security and our ability to shape local events are closely tied to our sustained economic strength. but the global economy is not going to wait for us. so the choice is not between moving forward with these agreements, or maintaining the status quo. the choice is between leading the world in a direction that supports american values and interests, thus enhancing the safety of american citizens, or
being left behind. these trade agreements are an integral part of our vision for a future where all countries follow the same rules of the road, and all countries benefit. a future where growing prosperity, supports our shared security. any side of -- at a time of shifting power in asia tpp confirms america's commitment to the region and growing prosperity throughout the asia-pacific for decades. as asia continues to grow and drive the global economy, our strategic interests in the region will become even more important, reserving piece and preventing maritime or territorial disputes. also sprinkling the rule of law advancing human rights, and
promoting inclusive development. we are committed to shaping the development of this region that will only grow more important in the future. meanwhile, we will strengthen our transatlantic bond, and put us in a stronger position to take on shared challenges with our closest allies. we seek to build an economic relationship to match the scope and further strengthen our security partnership with europe. let me be clear. growing the global economy is not a zero-sum contest between established and emerging powers. if we work together to grow the whole time, we will all be better off. that is why president obama elevated the g 20 to be the premier forum for global economic cooperation. to make sure that the world
's fastest-growing economies are also part of the economic discussions. that's why we will encourage new institutions like the aged infrastructure investment bank to uphold the standards that underpin sustainable and inclusive economic growth. we are also committed to modernizing established institutions of global finance like the international literary fund. the imf coordinated a response to an international debt crisis brought on by on socks. -- oil shocks. today, the ins is the first responder to global crises. helping ukraine stand up against russian aggression. securing our allies in the middle east against extremists. providing economic relief for
countries fighting: in west africa. proposed that congress should pass imf reform so that we can enjoy our g 20 partners to strengthen this full work of economic security. [applause] third, we are experiencing prosperity through inclusive growth. developing economies provide new markets are growing middle classes, and customers that are essential to sustaining american economic strength. we are forming partnerships that help countries lift themselves
up. we are harnessing the resources and expertise of the private sector to buy our efforts. so take the lines for the food security. we are strengthening agriculture and helping farmers across africa raise their incomes. take power africa: $7 billion from the u.s. government, including support from exim we have brought in more than $20 million from the private sector, increasing assess to electricity across africa. american firms will show that we eager to expand into african markets. they want to do doo for
businesses united states. that is why these are such effective tools for spring broad-based development. the african growth and opportunity act makes it easier for businesses to sell their goods in the united states. that helps grow africa's middle-class, who in turn by high-quality american products. both africa's nonoil exports to the united states and american exports to africa have more than tripled. president obama strongly supports the bipartisan legislation introduced last week in the house and the senate to update and renew for the next 10 years. [applause]
with more than half the world population on under the age of 30, we are investing in job training, entrepreneurship and educational opportunities for you people. through our edition of initiatives in our, southeast asia, and most recently in the americas will your empowering the next generation of skill and experience to help them succeed. with the spark global dr. offered worship initiative we will hundred dollars to help young launched and expand new enterprise. and the seller, president obama will participate in the 2015 global entrepreneurship summit in kenya. by spurring trade, setting 21st-century standards, and building the cassidy of our partners, we strengthen our
ability to take on global challenges like climate change. the united states is leading the charge to achieving a strong international climate agreement this december in paris. we have set an ambitious climate target for ourselves, and announced joint actions with other major emitters, including china, india, and mexico. at the same time, we are developing clean energy solutions that will fuel our continued economic growth. working with partners to set emissions targets that will mitigate the worst effects of climate change, and help in vulnerable countries were improve their resistance to climate change. our economic tools also defend america's national security interests. consider, for example, our engagement with iran. our p5 plus one partners, we have successfully reached an
initial framework agreement. for a long-term deal to prevent iran from gaining a nuclear weapon. that deal when all caps been in the row -- would not have been in the realm of the possible without the strong and rigorous enforced sanctions that brought around to the negotiating table. when we employ sanctions we target those who flout international norms. while minimizing the impact to the broader global economy. we rely on sanctions and other financial tools to cut off terrorist financing and disrupt transnational criminal organizations. coordinated sanctions with our european partners are imposing costs on russia for its aggression against ukraine. and as online commerce continues to grow, we are developing dynamic approaches to enhancing cyber security, including the
recently issued executive order authorizing sanctions to deter the worst cyber actors. this brings me to my final point. we rely on the private sector to advance america's values and economic leadership. and the government, we are open to accessing foreign markets. we protect our sea lanes and are skyways. since 2010 our commercial advocacy has helped american arms to sign contracts totaling more than $200 billion in new exports. at the same time, american businesses on the foundation of our economic strength. upon which, so let's of our security and prosperity depends. so both the government, and the
private sector have responsibilities to fulfill. for example, corruption costs the global economy about $2.6 trillion each year. we have made anticorruption efforts a centerpiece of our foreign assistance strategy. if countries want development compacts from the millennium challenge corporation, they must embrace good governance. through the open government partnership, we are working with more than 65 patients to improve economic transparency. and the department of justice has been first in prosecuting those who pay or seek bribes in international commerce. we also count on american companies to meet the highest standards of responsible business practices. we hold an advantage in the global marketplace because our countries that companies are
known as accountable transparent partners. we are developing in partnership with industry a national action plan to promote responsible business conduct and to ensure the american brand in business reflects american values. leading in the 21st century isn't just about the mind of our military, it is about every element of american power, including economic power, to promote universal values and expand opportunity for all people. it means using diplomacy throughout its partners to meet global challenges. it means influencing development policies that do not just put a band-aid on poverty. they help to eradicate it. and it means fostering a vibrant domestic economy and policies that expand our shared
prosperity. when president obama spoke at this conference five years ago he issued a call to make this century another american century. as a nation we have come a long way since then. it has taken hard work and characteristic american great to climb out of a deep hole, and we are not done yet. without researching economy are on that network of partners and allies, and our firm commitment to expand prosperity, we will continue to pursue a future of shared prosperity that benefits all people. we will ensure that americans continue to lead the global economy throughout this century just as we did in the last. thank you all very much. [applause]
justice department employees. the ceremony will work his six years of service. the senate confirmed loretta lynch to take over his post yesterday and she will be sworn in by the vice president on monday. that is coming up life at 2:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. until then, part of today's washington journal, as we asked for your thoughts on the older legacy. we are talking about eric holder and his six years as attorney general. mcconnell whipped for lynch mitch mcconnell worked to round up more than 60 votes to end the filibuster of loretta lynch. he held up her confirmation vote for weeks. mcconnell worked to ensure she would overcome a filibuster, pitting him against ted cruz and
other conservatives. some same o'connell wanted to avoid a battle over the nuclear option. the tactic henry reed employed to reduce the threshold for ending a filibuster from 60 votes to a simple majority. one lawmaker said mitch mcconnell talk to colleagues about voting to advance lynch to a final up or down vote. in the washington times is this op-ed. in 2014, they came out with a book called "obama's enforcer." here is a little bit from this op-ed. as eric holder departs, he leaves behind a justice department that has been politicized to an unprecedented degree. they are obligated to enforce
the law in an unbiased manner. they must image straight regard for the best interests of the public and to uphold the constitution and laws of the united states. prior attorneys of both political parties have fulfilled that duty to the highest standards. not eric holder. they write -- mr. holder's failure to uphold the laws is a particularly acute betrayal of the standard that applies to the attorney general. instead of acting as the chief law enforcement officer, he has acted as the political lawyer of an overly partisan president. perhaps that is why he has one of the lowest approval ratings of any public official. here are some of the issues eric holder faced.
same-sex marriage, voting rights act and voter id laws, criminal justice reform, civil rights, the 2008 financial crisis, and drove attacks. those are some issues he faced. (202) 748-8000 if you approve as his -- if you approve of his performance as a turn i -- as attorney general. (202) 748-8001 if you disapprove. guest:caller: i approve of his performance. he is trying to hold certain people's feed to the fire. he is trying to bring attention to issues that some, in the conservative white community want to ignore.
he tries to bring issues like police brutality, voting rights, disparities in the justice system. i can speak as a 50-year-old black man that there are some within the conservative white community that do not want these issues to be brought to the attention. the attorney general has done a good job. host: this is brian, potomac maryland. go ahead. caller: good morning. i am a liberal democrat. i am hopeful hillary will be our next president. i voted for president obama twice in the general election. it is great mr. hagel is no longer secretary of defense, but my least, the cabinet member of
president obama that i disproved of most -- that i disapproved of most was eric holder. i was a huge supporter of bill clinton. eric holder had difficulty with some of the pardons at the end -- and i am not going to take that out on obama or holder however, holder represents -- and i am sensitive to what he says. host: what is it about eric holder you disapprove of? caller: he is an establishment guy. it is important to have someone of color. i am glad loretta lynch got through. eric holder was the one behind
all of the establishment resistance to getting rid of guantanamo and all of the things after the bush cheney policies, now we have this disaster on the other side. it is like these -- and i am not one of these rand paul/ron paul libertarians. his chief law enforcement officer should have enforced it. host: let's leave it there. thank you for calling in. in 2013, the voting rights act was on the table. [video clip] attorney general holder: it in validated a part of the voting rights act, a cornerstone of
american civil rights law. i am deeply disappointed with the court's decision in this matter. it is a setback for voting rights and will negatively affect millions of americans across the country. since its passage in 1965, the act has enjoyed broad bipartisan support in congress as well as the executive branch. after hearings, sections four and five of this law were reauthorized, most recently in 2006. just seven years ago. it had unanimous support of the senate and near unanimous support of the house of representatives. this is a legislative function and responsibility that the constitution gave to congress.
the last reauthorization was signed into law by president george w. bush. prior reauthorizations had been signed by ford, reagan, and next in. -- and nixon. host: a little bit from eric holder on the voter rights act. his team's balancing act often aligns with police. he has supported police officers every time an excessive force case has made its way to arguments, even as it has opened more than 20 civil rights investigations into law enforcement practices. the justice department has made it harder to sue police and give officers more discretion about when to fire guns.
police groups see mr. holder as an ally. that has rankled civil rights lawyers, who say the government can have a greater effect on policing by interpreting law at the supreme court than through investigations of individual departments. south carolina, what do you think? caller: he has done a fantastic job. he has done better than anyone i have ever seen as attorney general. he has followed the rule of law. he has not once done anything i conclude to be an overreach. he has done a fantastic job. host: paul is in orlando and he does not approve. why not? caller: thank you for taking my call. thank you for c-span.
the fund piece stole my thunder. the attorney general got off to a strange start. remember when he said when it came to race, americans were cowards? with all due respect to your first caller, white people get uncomfortable talking about race because if we disagree with this president or that attorney general, we are called racist. ima am a republican. i voted for obama the first time -- i am a republican. i voted for obama the first time. i did not vote for him the second time. does that make me racist? is your producer within earshot? host: the producer is always
listening. caller: i suggested a behind the scenes for the "washington journal" junkies. if you are not considering it, i hope you would. host: thank you for calling in. we will talk to you again in 30 days. regular viewers will remember when eric holder and louis beaumont got into a heated exchange during a hearing. [video clip] >> it is inadequate. it is important that we have proper oversight. >> you do not want to go there. >> about the contempt? >> you should not assume it is not a big deal to me. it was inappropriate and unjust.
do not think it was not a big deal to me. do not ever think that. >> i am just looking for evidence. there have been no indications it has been a big deal. your department has not been forthcoming in producing documents that were the subjects of the contempt. there have been other questions asked about the -- >> the documents we were prepared to make available then, we are prepared to make them available now. this is about a desire to have -- >> we have been trying to get to the bottom of fast and furious where at least a couple hundred mexicans died and we cannot get the information to get to the bottom of that. i do not need lectures from you about contempt. as a former judge, i never have asked questions of someone who
has been held in contempt. we waited until the contempt and then we asked questions. host: this tweet -- i approve of eric holder because he is not afraid of republicans. linda, mississippi. caller: good morning. i approve of attorney general holder because he does his job. he does not make excuses. that is why the republicans are so against him. the congressman had contempt for him because he did not back down. he gave him information he needed, but they wanted him to beg and plead. he is a strong black man.
he did a great job. the washington times wrote the hiring that has gone on, such as the civil rights division, guarantees that ideologues will permeate the department for years to come. andrew mccarthy has set under eric holder the justice department has become a program for progressive activists being counters, and at lawyers who volunteered services during the bush years to help al qaeda operatives file lawsuits against the united states. the theories advanced by the administration have been outside the mainstream and the u.s.
supreme court has ruled against mr. holder's justice department unanimously almost two dozen times. justin. caller: i disapprove of his job and i do not want to sugarcoat it. there have been a couple of callers who have touched on the race issue. what do we expect out of our attorney general? he should defend and uphold the constitution. meanwhile, we have society teetering on the cliffs. there are tons of people accused of crimes in guantanamo bay bay. what has eric holder done to advance the liberties of those people?
also, with regard to him being obama's enforcer, that is what he is. one caller touched on something i think makes a lot of sense. he carries out the orders like a henchman. taking nothing away from him as a man, he is accomplished as a black man. he has been successful in his life. no one can take that away from him. he has come far. he leaves much to be expected. thank you. host: raphael, battle creek, michigan. caller: good morning. how is brian? host: brian is fine. caller: eric holder, was he not
the attorney general when obama was elected? host: he has been attorney general since 2009. i was thinking about the mortgage crisis -- caller: i was thinking about the mortgage crisis. in 2016 these are not going to repeat themselves. that is my main concern. host: raphael, battle creek michigan. this tweet from victor. chris is in milwaukee. caller: the previous caller
stole my thunder. that is why i disapprove of him. nobody on wall street went to jail. i wrote letters to my senator congressman, the president. i wanted someone to pay for it. they blamed it on the people. in the and the banks gave them mortgages that no one should have given the mortgages. it has nothing to do with him being black, purple, or yellow. i did not like the fact that he got into local crimes. that is what these race things work. they were local. usually that is handled by the county. at least, it is in our start -- in our state. he should have stayed out of it.
host: he talked about the issues in ferguson recently. [video clip] >> investigation shows that members of ferguson's police would frequently escalate instead of diffuse. actions included arresting people for talking back to officers and engaging in activity that is constitutionally protected. these behaviors have the potential of stifling community conflicts and is vital for policing. this in turn leads to distrust of the department's exercise of police power, none of which is
as harmful as its pattern of excessive force. among the incident discovered by our conference of review some came from stops or arrest the had no legal basis to begin with, others were reputed to or retaliated -- reputedgnative. records showed using unnecessary force against people with mental illness. our findings found that overwhelming use of force, almost 90%, was directed towards african-americans. this deeply alarming statistic points to one of the most pernicious ta that are report found that these tasks overwhelmingly target
african-americans. there was explicit and implicit rachel bias. host: don ritchie tweets in the people who impose them -- oppose him just don't think brown people. a couple of facebook comments we have been getting this morning. keith says that holder is the most corrupt ag and history. don says the most racist ag in history. dot says that historians will write holder as being a very good attorney general and he will go down in history as such. jeremy says that he was the worst of all time, but loretta lynch will probably take his spot soon. cindy says not good until the last month. some of the facebook comments. if you want to participate in
the conversation on facebook, facebook.com/cspan. darrell, what do you think of eric holder's performance? caller: i think mr. holder was a great attorney general. i don't think a lot of americans are used to black people being well-versed in their language. i hear a lot of the comments about people saying how he is a racist or not a racist. they do not go on to say that they are not a bigot. the is another important thing. they refer to the president as being halfway like that half white makes them a better person than being half black. this country needs to get itself together. they are outside forces that are more important. republicans need to call into rush limbaugh and voice their opinions instead of c-span.
thank you guys, have a good day. host: as it in washington. you are calling on the disapproval line, why is that? caller: good morning. it is actually 4:23 in the morning here in washington. i would like to begin about eric holder, barack obama, and actually little bit about marijuana. i believe that these two folks have spoken very well on the subject that marijuana should be legalized. we here have done that now. basically, -- i'm sorry i'm getting distracted. i'm getting myself around it. host: let's tell you what, will let it sit there. we will move on to dorothy in baltimore.
dorothy, what you think about eric holder? caller: to the person who said he shouldn't be involved in the local law enforcement, he should have. [indiscernible] you need to have the attorney general involved. they will look out for the people and everybody. this is not a race thing. i will not say anything about race. i do know that eric holder and obama have done an excellent job in dealing with the average american citizen. thank you. host: recently the attorney general talked about reducing prison sentences for a nonviolent criminal. [video clip]
>> today it is clear that we are making significant progress towards this goal. in the year before, roughly 64% of federally charge drug trafficking offenses carried a minimum sentence. last year, that number came down to 51%. the reduction of 20% relative to the prior year. we've also gone toward seeking a minimum penalty in two of every three drug trafficking cases to doing so in one out of two. i is a major reduction. in fact, it is a story. the sentencing commission shows that these federal prosecutors sought the minimum and had a lower rate in 2014 than any other year. this shows a significant impact that our policy reforms are having.
other factors may play a role in the drop of overall drug cases but a crime this pronounced and the rate at which i prosecutors seek mandatory minimum sentences . these are extremely encouraging results. itthey demonstrate that the federal justice system has begun to operate more efficiently by reducing its involvement in low-level criminal activity more effectively by targeting the most serious crimes and more fairly by ensuring that those who are convicted of crimes receive sentences that are commiserate with their conduct. host: from "the nation" magazine -- eric holder's mixed record. this is their take on his record . as the first black attorney general, eric holder, built a
legacy as a tough defender of civil rights and racial justice. the path we are on is far from sustainable, as he put it in 2013. holder rolled back some of the criminal justice systems worst features. while he investigated police misconduct and pushing alternatives to a consummation. he also returned the justice department's civil rights division to fighting form, and forcing the voting rights act. in 2012, the division invoked the act to block voter id laws in texas and south carolina as well as florida's cutbacks in early voting. in other areas, he has hardly been a champion of liberal values.
more whistleblowers have been prosecuted under president obama then under all previous presidents combined. in fact, here is a chart showing all those people who have been prosecuted. here is one under president nixon, one under ronald reagan, one under george bush, and all of these folks have been prosecuted for leaking classified information under the obama administration. james in marysville, washington, you are on the "washington journal." caller: good morning. i approve with mr. holder. [indiscernible]
he is taken his life and his own hands, trying to deliver this for the people of the united states. host: marty in mystic beach, new york. what's your view of eric holder? caller: good morning pete. i read very eric holder. he is probably one of the greatest national figures that we had in recent years. host: why is that? caller: that scene that took place in nevada on the bundy ranch, these terrorists had federal officials stand down. they were armed. he started an investigation against that group, do you know? host: i don't offhand. i haven't thought about that in
a while. thanks for bringing that up. bob is in virginia. bob, what is your view? caller: you know, i don't approve of him or disapprove. i was kind of disappointed that he hasn't used his statue in his position to tell people in this country -- in richmond, virginia, there is not a day that goes by without robberies and murders and 99% of it is black foldks. i think if they deserve anything, it is to go to jail for being frivolous. that is my thought. host: "new york times" -- eric
holder's legacy. this is by their editorial board. mr. holder has taken strong positions on many of the contested issues of our time, but his record is marred by the role the justice department played in matters of secrecy and national security. when it comes to same-sex marriage, into 11, mr. holder announced that the justice department would not defend the defense of marriage act, an unconstitutional law, which defined marriage under federal law as between a man and a woman. george and colorado, disapprove line. go ahead. caller: i disapprove of eric holder's performance as attorney general. i disapprove of the
administration in total. they seem to be just liars. you can tell when they are lying because their mouths are moving. eric holder sent guns to mexican cartel criminals, and in my opinion, that makes him a criminal as well. it was said yesterday on this program that obama taught constitutional law. i'm afraid obama must have taught -- must haved taught how to get around constitutional law and eric holder has been taking lessons from him. host: maverick tweets in that under holder, justice department curtailed federal program that allowed police to seize cash and other property without evidence of a crime. back to "the new york times." on the financial front, he did not prosecute any prominent
bigger or firm in connection with the subprime mortgage crisis that nearly destroyed the economy. these are not accomplishments to be proud of. duane in jamaica, new york. what do you think of eric holder's legacy? caller: i approve of eric holder. you just a slate on the screen that all of his accompaniments -- just displayed on the screen all of his accomplishment. what more can this man do in six and a half years? you expect him to change a whole and entire country and one snap of a finger? it is unreasonable. the colors are being -- callers are being unreasonable. it amazes me how americans can jump on one person and think one person can change the whole entire world. thanks for listening, steve. host: henrietta and illinois. henrietta, good morning.
caller: hello. good morning. i strongly disapprove of eric holder. i think he is a crook. he did not prosecute for the -- scandal. he lies. then cartel. he lies. everything he touched, he lied. he and obama are cut from the same cloth. host: she love from georgia. what do you think? caller: hi, peter. i really wanted to talk to you for such a long time. i have one question for you peterson's, have you ever heard again from the peterson's? host: no. from texas. the older couple who used to call in and both get on the line at the same time.
no. you know what, i have not heard from them in a long time. if they are listening, let's hope they try to call in or get a note to us. caller: anyway, about eric holder. i approve of him, but they are going on the wrong premise. are you there, peter? host: we are all listening. caller: they are going on the wrong premise. the thing is what has to be changed if the laws. im 65. a used to be the back in the day, if you tell light was out the policeman might stop you and say, did you know your tell light was out? oh, i didn't know that, they would tell you to get it fixed and you would go on your way.
today, it's a reason to give you a ticket to fill up the coffers of the city or county. you get the ticket, and some places it's like $200, you don't have the money and 70% of the people in this country are making it. you don't have the $200. you might go to court. you just don't go. what happens is you get picked up. then you end up going to jail. then you have a misdemeanor. the time you spend in jail, you might lose your job or something. those are the laws that need to be changed. host: she francis from tennessee. what is your view?
caller: i disapprove of eric holder. when the irs said they had targeted conservative groups, what did he do? he appointed a person in the justice department who had given money to the democrats. how in the world could that be a fair and complete investigation of what the irs had done? nobody has been held accountable for what happened to the irs. my second reason for disapproving of mr. holder is that in areas where crime is rampant, we don't hear very much about that. what we hear a lot about his policeman -- is policeman. maybe policeman do do wrong, but what we know is that crime is very harsh and areas like chicago. how much have we heard about that?
it has been very quiet on that particular issue. i would like to see the c-span, this morning, you had three calls for him and only one against. i think there must be some way that the people on c-span can come up with 1, 2, 3. we are not asking for a partial number, just a fair accounting of opinions. thank you very much. host: some of the issues that eric holder has faced as attorney general over the last six years include same-sex marriage, the voting right's acts, the 2008 financial crisis drone attacks, among others. when president obama was at the official unveiling of eric holder's portrait, he talked about his attorney general.
[video clip] president obama: i think about all the young people out there who have seen you work and have been able to get an innate sense, without knowing you personally, that you are a good man. having good men in positions of power and authority, who are willing to fight for what is right, that is a rare thing. that is a powerful thing. it is something that shapes our future in ways we don't even understand or imagine. it made me very proud. eric, your country thank you for your honorable vision, your unwavering passion, and as he gently from kentucky said you are a dusty to care. michelle and i thank you for being a friend and partner throughout this incredible
journey. and to all the men and women of the department of justice, thank you for your service on behalf of the american people. host: when eric holder announced his resignation back in september, "wall street journal" did a legacy -- their take on his legacy. they said that one would be hard put to identify and attorney general who so explicitly turned the justice department into a political weapon. for an office occupied by kennedy and mitchell, that is saying something. earl, would you think of eric holder and his legacy? caller: i will say right off the bat, every since i was 18 years old, i went to new york and traveled the world i found that this country has been a racist country against minorities. people will not knowledge that.
-- not acknowledge that. i saw it in new york. there were all these city employees who were white. all firemen were practically white. every government employee was practically all white. still to this day i see in ferguson, 67% of the people are african-americans and not one on the city council, and only about three on the police force are a minority. i think it is outrageous. i see a lot of encouragement -- do you notice that the ads coming out on a lot of stuff, i don't care if it is lysol or cough drops they have a minority in their now. years ago they never had that. host: type that -- tie that together, if you would with eric holder. caller: the justice department
is overseeing this. he was going to go round and have certain police departments in cities -- the justice department, in an bio things up -- and rile things up i am for that. host: and is next on the disapprove line. caller: i very strongly disapprove of eric holder. the irs not prosecuting and the people he appointed to not see into that, he has divided the classes. there is no warrant for taping of united states citizens. he is in obama's pocket. he does whatever obama tells them to. they are all a bunch of crooks. america has to wake up and see what is happening. host: from facebook, harry says he approves.
steve says, just as good as anyone else that has had this job, maybe better. jonathan says, he pretty much ended federal nonviolent marijuana enforcement, so he is awesome in my book. one more comment from eric, disapprove has set race relations back 50 years. kenny in tampa, go ahead, we are all listening. caller: first of all, i think eric holder will be for members and history as truthful. there is a despair's accountability of law enforcement for the black community. a bridge -- he built a bridge that this dialogue will finally be happening. as far as eric holder's tenacity
toward standing up for what is right, i think again, this country will judge him as one of the most fruitful and forward agents that we have had. host: mrs. anthony in washington dc -- this is anthony and washington d.c.. caller: people keep calling in and talking about the financial situation in our country and no one want to jail. no one went to jail because of what the banks did was not illegal. people forget that we had -- once you deregulate things, what people did was legal. it was unethical, but legal. in reference to fast and
furious, that started with a previous attorney general. when eric holder found out about it, he stopped it. i approve of everything he has done. i think he did a great job. host: senator ted cruz who did not vote on the loretta lynch nomination yesterday did take to the senate floor to criticize eric holder. [video clip] senator cruz: attorney general eric holder has been the most partisan attorney general that the united states has ever seen. the attorney general has systematically refused to do anything to seriously investigate or prosecute the irs targeting citizens for expressing their first amendment rights. indeed, he has assigned the investigation to a major democratic voter and partisan democrat who has given over h $6 million to the democrats. eric holder has abused the
office and turned it, in many respects, to a partisan arm of the democratic party. he is the only attorney general in the history of the united states to be held in contempt of congress. there are many, including me, who would very much like to see eric holder replaced. there are many, including me, who would like to see an attorney general who would return to the bipartisan principles of the department of justice and fidelity to law. that includes the willingness to stand up to the president who appointed you, even if he or she is from the same political party as you. host: this article is in the "new york times," ted cruz is guess up to gate businessman -- gay businessman. it is probably too long for us to read here. it is on the new york times website. aj, baton rouge.
caller: good morning, peter. i do not blame eric holder for the way he is. this administration and the democrats are totally -- you can't believe anything these people say. something about keeping your doctors, your insurance. everything they talk about is lies, lies, lies. i don't blame eric holder. he is just caring -- carrying on what his boss wants. >> we leave this portion of the "washington journal." we go now live to the justice department for an outgoing ceremony with eric holder. live coverage under way now. [applause] atty. gen. holder: thank you.
please take your seats. [laughter] ok. a couple of business items. my toward -- my portrait hangs on the fifth floor of the justice department. it has not been mentioned, my kids names are hidden in the portrait. if you look on the button of my jacket and on the wings of the eagle, you will find three of them. that is the lure that i want to come out of the portrait, find the names of the older children. i want to check to make sure that you know you are on annual leave. [laughter] in my final act as attorney general, screw it. [laughter]
this has been a great six years. being at the justice department has -- i say the last six years but the reality is that i've been at this department since 1976 off and on. i started as a lawyer in the public integrity section. it is going to be hard for me -- not going to be, it is hard for me to walk away from the people who i love and who represent this institution that i love so much. it is time. it is time to make a transition. change is a good thing. i'm confident in the work that you have done that we have laid a foundation for even better things over the course of the next couple of years. i think that as we look back at
these past six years, what i want you to understand is that you have done truly historic -- historic and big things. no matter where you look. if you look at, at the basic stuff. this department is restored. it is restored to what it always was, and certainly what it was when i got here, and what it always must be. free of politicization, focused on missions, and making sure that justice is done, without any interference from political outsiders. we have expressed fate in the greatest court system in the world, and brought the toughest national security cases into that system, and with unbelievable results. the notion that we are still having a debate on whether or not cases should be brought in
the article three system, or in military tribunals is overpaid in is dead. that is again due to the great work that prosecutors and various districts have done in putting together wonderful cases and successfully trying those cases. we have had an impact on the environment, and companies that would help spoiled -- would have spoiled our environment. historic wins in that regard as well. if you look at financial recovery, berkeley related to the crisis, and huge amounts of money that we recovered. tony west is here, and he deserves a special thanks for that, and what was done with the money, tried to give it to people who suffered the most. [applause] the thought was never to sibley take that money and put it in
the u.s. treasury, but, with ways that we could get people back into their homes, or somehow try to reduce the debt load that they were dealing with . our trust division lives again and has had a tremendous impact in our country and in positive things that they have done for the american consumer. we announced, or her, today, that a merger -- which i think would have been extremely anticompetitive and not in the best interest of american consumers -- has beenn abandoned. that is the -- due to the great work of the trust division. disallowing the practice that had for too long gone on way people squared away money. indian country.
you think about the tough history that exists between united states and our native people. we have put on track, i think the ability to write some really historic wrongs. we have done, i think, a great deal. much work remains to be done. this justice department was committed to addressing those problems in the best way possible. criminal justice reform. if you look at statistics, you see incarceration rate goes like this and then it goes up and about 1974 late 70's. we are a nation that incarcerates too many people for too long and for no good law enforcement reason. it is time to change the approach is that we have been using for the past 30-40 years. through the great work of people in this department, we are starting to reverse that trend. again, more work remains to be
done. civil rights. the algae to be -- the lgbt community is something i tried to focus on. i think that is a civil rights issue of our time. this whole issue of same-sex marriage that will be resolved by the court over the next couple of months or so, hopefully that decision will go in a way that i think is consistent with who we are as a people. i also think that that is a sign, an indication, one part of the fight for overall lgbt a quality. i think the work that you have done in that regard will be an integral part of this legacy of the department. the thing that is some ways animates me, angers me, is this hold nation -- whole nation of the right to vote. we celebrated this year the 50th
anniversary of the passage of the voting rights act. i went to selma to commemorate bloody sunday. john lewis was here earlier. this nation fought a civil war, endured slavery, dealt with legalized segregation. a civil rights movement in the mid to early 60's transformed this nation. the notion that we would somehow go back and put in place things that make it more difficult for our fellow citizens to vote is simply inconsistent with all that is good about this country and something that i was bound and determined to fight. our civil rights division has done a superb job in crafting lawsuits based on an act that was wrongfully gutted by the supreme court. i think we will see successes from those cases that have been filed.
that, of all things, can simply not be allowed to happen. the right to vote must be protected. [applause] i want to thank my family, my lovely wife, for the sacrifices they have made over the years. not only to allow me to be attorney general, that's a deputy attorney general. honey, you have any rock in the family. [applause] you have allowed me the opportunity to do the things that really animatedly and allowed me to work with all these great people. i also want to say some thing about the folks that you see standing here. my detail.
these are people, men and women who literally sacrificed their well-being in terms of their interactions with their families, they travel with me, they missed weekends, they work long and hard hours, and are prepared to do ultimate kinds of things. i cannot do this job without them. they will not smile because they never do that. i see mark is a smiling a little bit there. [laughter] he is also smiling. [laughter] [applause] then, i just want to thank all
of you. all of you. you are what makes this institution great. we have a great building, and it is something that is historic and its nature. it is only cap great -- kept great by the dedication commands, the commitment that all of you show on a daily basis. i hope that you all will understand that the jobs that you have -- there is not a routine job in the department of justice, given the great power that we are entrusted with, the responsibility that we have. i don't want you to ever think that -- it is just tuesday, i will get through the day. that is not who we are. it is not who you are. i think that has certainly been shown in the way that you have conducted yourselves, and the way that you have accomplished
so much over the last six years. i said earlier that when we e celebrated robert kennedy's anniversary, the swearing-in in 2011, people said that that was the golden age for the u.s. department of justice. i think 50 years from now, and maybe even sooner than that people will look back at the work that you wanted and say that this was another golden age. that is how good you all are. that is how dedicated committed, and wonderful you all have been. the focus on justice, focus on helping those who cannot help themselves, you have to stick with yourself -- you have distinguished yourselves. every now and again at an appropriate time, a group comes along that is worthy of special recognition. you are one of those groups. i'm proud of you.
proud of you. i will miss you. i will miss his building, this institution, and more than anything, i will miss you. this building will always be home. you all will always be my family. wherever i am ,, and whatever i'm doing, i will be rooting for you from the sidelines. we have these bands that i have been wearing for the last whatever number of whatever is. i can officially take this off now. [laughter] [applause] i think we can officially say now that eric holder is free. [laughter]
it is not necessarily something that i want. i don't ever want to be free of this great institution. i don't want to ever be free of the relationships that i have forged with so many of you. i don't want to ever be free of the notion that i am a member of the united states department of justice. this is something that has meant the world to me. it has helped to define me as an individual and lawyer, as a man. for that reason although i got rid of those bands, i am free in one sense. it is really not consequential as the way i will never be free nor want to be free of the united states department of justice, or free from all of you. thank you for your support over the past six years. i look forward to all that you will do under the great new leadership of a wonderful attorney general who will be sworn in on monday.
i expect he will do great things over the course of the next two years, and be on that for those of you who are career employees. i expect that you will do great things as long as you are part of the justice department. there are some of you here who will be here 20 years from now 30 years from now. i believe your biographies will be littered with wonderful things. again, thank you so much. i will miss you. as i said, as i ended a previous speech -- this is my third going away. [laughter] i promise, it is the last one. i will end this one, i love you all badly. -- madly. thank you. [applause] >> eric holder at the justice department this afternoon. as he mentioned, loretta lynch will be sworn in on monday by
>> the white house correspondents association annual dinner is saturday with remarks from president obama and says the of "saturday night live ." one of the guest will be joyce woodhouse, we spoke to her recently on "washington journal." host: you may remember, if you watch this program beggarly, back in december, we had on to political consultants, the
woodhouse brothers. they are on opposing sides, by the way. during their segment, they received a phone call. here's the phone call. [video clip] host: let's go to joy. caller: you are right, i am from down south. i am your mother. i disagree that all families are like ours. i don't know many families that are fighting at thanksgiving. i was very glad that this thanksgiving was a year that you were supposed to go to your in-laws. i'm hoping that you will have some of his out of your system when you come here for christmas. i would really like a peaceful christmas. i love you both. host: let me jump in, this was not planned. she called in on the normal line. but since she did call in, mrs.
woodhouse, what is it like to raise these two boys? caller: it has not been easy. host: now, joyce woodhouse joins us on the phone from north carolina. the reason we are talking to mrs. woodhouse is because this weekend, the white house correspondents dinner is being held and mrs. woodhouse and her sons will be joining us as our guests. what do you think about coming to the dinner? guest: i think it is fantastic. every year i watch this event on c-span. you come in early. i have always dreamed of going to the event. a couple years ago, my son brad and his wife jessica attended. i watched the entire event.
i did see them. although, they did not say at the same table. they had -- she is a republican and somebody had invited her and somebody else had invited brad. they sat at different tables which was interesting. host: we are looking forward to having you appear and beat you. who are you looking forward to meeting? who are you hoping to see? guest: i'm looking forward to meeting you people from c-span. you have been so kind to me. i'm looking forward to hearing the president, the comedian -- i would hate to be the comedian because i watch this, as i said, for a number of years. the president is a great comedian himself. his timing is really good.
i would hate to follow in his footsteps. and i'm looking forward to meeting the president and mrs. obama because i'm going to get to go to be reception -- yes, to the chairman's reception, with mr. scully. host: wow!. congratulations. are you going to sit between your funds to keep the peace? guest: probably. if i think they're going to act decent, i might sit beside somebody from c-span, and have a nice conversation with them. host: what if they get out of hand? guest: i will try to rein them in. as i said before, it is not easy. one thing -- after i was on
c-span which obviously hit a nerve. i had people call and put on facebook -- i have two daughters who are always fighting at christmas, and we have a horrible christmas. i didn't mean to give that impression. i have a grandchildren -- eight grandchildren, and it really gets loud before everyone starts arguing, and i would prefer that they did it, but later they go out and do things together. they don't hold a grudge. which is good. they talk back and forth on, they hang up on each other, but they still love each other, and are decent to each other when they see one another. host: joyce woodhouse, looking
forward to have a you appear in washington tomorrow as a guest of c-span. safe travels on your way up. we will see you at the dinner. thanks for joining us. guest: thank you again. i just appreciate how nice you folks have been to me and my family. >> our live coverage of the white house correspondents' dinner gets underway on saturday at 6:00 eastern on c-span. coming up next on c-span, a conversation on trade and the transpacific partnership, a free-trade agreement with the u.s. and 11 other countries around the pacific region. from the atlantic council, this is one hour. >> good morning, everyone. we are about to get started. can you hear me?
do we need more volume? good morning, everyone. i am fred ckempe, and you are joining us for what i hope will be a historic moment. secretary of state john kerry will join us at 10:00 to provide keynote remarks for the launch of our new trade and national security initiative. we are also building a business coalition for trade and security to help highlight the geopolitical implications of the obama mr. shin's oh -- obama administration's trade initiatives, to draw attention to not only be benefit, but the cost of inaction and failure. anyone, if you're interested in getting more information on that, please contact me in my office directly. the secretary will discuss the vital importance of trade in
securing the future of u.s. leadership in the world, making sure we are stronger partners of our allies. american leaders have understood the strategic logic of trade, at least since franklin delano roosevelt signed the reciprocal trade act of 1934, which through its five years, ultimately included 19 trade agreements. don't forget what a historic trade moment that was in the history of the 21st century. many years and one world war later, he called it an expression of america's free world leadership. president kennedy made a lot of news around the world in 1963 with his speech as he stood up for the defense of a free west berlin.
less remembered was his speech the same week, a bit earlier, at the st. paul's church in frankfurt, where he talked about the equal vital need of an economic alliance. it almost like he called for an economic nato. said kennedy, indeed, economic cooperation is needed through the entire free world by opening more free markets to africa asia, and latin america bi, we can help assure them a favorable climate for freedom and growth. he had to that -- and to that saying it was an event and responsibility. today, we gather at a moment of new atlantic responsibility. the idea of trade being geopolitically important it is not a particular new one, but we do have a new inflection point, which we hear at the atlantic council feel is as important as
the end of world war i in 1919, the and of world war ii and, and what galvanizes our work is that each of those moments of history, it has been u.s. leadership with our friends and allies, or lack thereof, that has she he future. it is certain that if we do not leave, others will fill the void, as we have seen in ukraine and syria. as you know, president obama likes basketball. he has referred to the last two years of his second term as the fourth quarter of his presidency. as the clock ticks down, he is making some big that's on before policy front, on iran, cuba, and elsewhere. yet, for all the publicity that those efforts have gained, their completion would not do as much to shape a new world order through this defining moment as
the obama trade agenda, which could bring two thirds of the world's economies under a set of strictures that are very friendly to our allies that we have tried to create after world war ii. that is what we are here to discuss today. timing couldn't be better. while secretary kerry makes his arguments here, u.s. trade representative kirk is in china. the u.s. and eu are hosting the ninth round of talks in new york city. last week, bipartisan trade promotion authority bill was introduced in the senate. senators ted cruz and paul ryan endorsed it yesterday. with that said, let me turn to individuals who are uniquely qualified to talk about the connection between american economic strength and the place of these trade and investment
agreements and national security, and i will ask them to come to the stage as i enters them. for our audience and online, we welcome your participation in this dialogue. our twitter hashtag is #actrade. brief introductions. caroline atkinson is the death the national security advisor for economic affairs at the white house. no one better to address these issues and provide insight into the obama administration straight efforts. jeter looked -- general jim jones, chairman on our center for international security, and the atlantic council board director former advisor to barack obama and former supreme commander in europe. there is perhaps no one who has been more consistent of a
spokesman on the connection between national competitors competitiveness and security. paula dobriansky will provide a republican view on the president's legacy moment and can give us insight on how the trade initiative is being viewed from the other side of the aisle. in many ways, it was midterm elections. this is the one legacy moment that is made easier because of midterm elections rather than harder. we are delighted to be joined by australia's ambassador to the u.s. kim beazley, representing an allied nation with whom we artie have a trade agreement and the key partner in the transpacific partnership. he is a rhodes scholar. he can bring all of his
portfolios to bear, and prominent member of the australian parliament. let me sit down and get this conversation going. the panelists do not have prepared comments. what i will do is ask them questions down the line. but just to make it as informal as possible, if you see, even in this opening round, one of the speakers said something you'd like to comment on, feel free to jump in and we'll do it in a little less formal fashion. so, for caroline, how much of a legacy moment is this for the president? how does the president see this in the context of everything else he is trying to get done in