tv Key Capitol Hill Hearings CSPAN January 8, 2016 6:15pm-12:01am EST
to do with the money. they send the money back. you think they send back more or less. [laughter] governor kasich: in my state they wanted me to build a high-speed train. it was the only train i could think of that i could run faster . it was going to run 39 miles an hour. what i would do is send a couple of monies to washington and maintain the interstate and let het and pave your own roads. you could reduce the tax. and you would have the former speaker and more resources and actually toll. you can't toll a federal. that's another program. when it comes to the student loan.
i have been a big privatization person. what are the biggest thing. the president of ohio state decided to least parking garages and the surface transportation. he was opposed by the university community but he did it any way. he received half a billion dollars for leasing those assets, which goes to scholarships. why is the university running a parking garage, anything, their job is to teach this kid, not to run this other stuff. how about looking around and other poem. how about. you have to think differently. it is the 21 century. and how about online courses and more professors that can speak english, that is another novel
idea. there you go. audience member: i have been looking at the sign up here. it says a strong america is a safe america, please tell us what your thoughts are and what's up there. governor kasich: i haven't seen that sign before. if you don't have a strong economy, you can't have strong defense. you can't have the strong dens if you don't have money to pay for it. leadership. strong economically, and when you are strong economically it lps you to be strong defensively. we have to stop this defense and shift power, money and influence back to where we live and
governor kasich: we need you. keep plugging. >> ohio governor john kasich talking with support is people interested in his campaign in exeter, new hampshire. we are going to take your phone calls and let us know what you thought tonight. host: a couple of people holding on the line going to the republican line. ohio, go ahead. caller: you know, i live in ohio and i see his plans and policies
and only politician who is so honest and so truth telling and look at the facts all the time in his time in the state senate. misquoted abe bra ham lincoln. he is the most qualified. 18 years in the armed services committee. he balanced the federal budget. he got things down. in ohio he has cut taxes, largest amount of any sitting governor. now there is a $2 billion, $365 jobs lost and 385 jobs gained. and ohio is doing well and ohio is a micro costism of america. i'm 15 years old and i strongly
believe he is the most qualified candidate. host: if you look at the his poll numbers. caller: three in a row he has been in third place. and comes down to the last few days. i think governor kasich is going to be the story. host: columbus ohio. caller: yeah. i tremendously dishe appointed on his responses on climate change. the national academy of sciences urged cuts in carbon pollution 10 years ago. we have the world's leading body saying we have irreversible harm
e.p.a. cuts and rejects a carbon tax. he is not taking this issue seriously and not admitting it. he doesn't believe that humans are the maybe reen. host: who is your candidate? caller: the democratic nominee. ost: karl from new mexico. caller: i live in new mexico and s far as i can see our government is in a problem. and i was very impressed with the speech and just my support and my attention.
impressive e most person that i've heard from of the candidates. ost: thanks for your call. traveling around the state trying to get some support and heard from an earlier caller, he is running in a tie for third in new hampshire. look at tweets. governor kasich trying to ease the job createors with the full house in hamentp ton, new hampshire. talking about the leader there in new hampshire. donald trump. "the hill" pro rsh reporting. a couple of the other candidates.
clinton's sex scandals are now off limits. and christie purchasing air time, $1525, you could read more ol politico. d carson leaves open the run for congress. abouthat you have to hear the kasich event. caller: i live in wyoming, this is the first time i heard anything on the governor and i'm quite impressed with what he is saying. he is on the run that i heard so far that makes any sense. i just gave about voting. i will not vote for any of the
two front runners and i would like to hear more from mr. kasich and hear what he is saying from climate change. i'm 81 years old and social security is a concern and environment is a concern and i mean he we got to live more than . host: one of the things he has done back home and visiting new hampshire got a chance to talk with a number of pim taking questions. we have a number of events that we have covered. .ou can look back at c-span.org democrats line frer ennsylvania. >> i want to say to the governor
seems like a very wonderful man but i'm very strong on donald trump. he's got our back. he is so strong and he will rotect us. hoifedhoupped be a trlt ever trulttrum will supporter. donald trump is wonderful. hoft host sean. caller: i would like to comment on governor kasich's campaign. i'm 25 years old and combat veteran and a lot of people aren't going to vote for any republican for him. young people here prison reform,
you get a small traffic ticket and your life is ruined. ti want to hear about social reform. i live in washington. the highest minimum. seattle, $16. no one cares any more about isis. because it doesn't directly affect them. it is getting a job and being ble to live. everyone talks about isis but still have the highest rate of prisoners and people feel hopeless, i deposit vote in the last election because it doesn't matter. host: looking at some of the
ndidates, bush, kasich and christie. they have signed skeve laws. and in new hampshire, each in desperate to beat the other. and what was once envisioned, candidates like them with experience, bush, christie and kasich are trying to distinguish themselves in the age of donald trump. from the "washington post." we have a caller from ohio. high arthur. caller: i want to thank crmp span for this kind of show. i listen to c-span and i'm not a
regular, this is a great public service. so, you know, i'm getting on years but ohio has been good for me. i voted democrat and republican and i view myself as an independent. over these years, john kasich has been the best governor in the state of ohio. i would point out that he has experience at the federal level, important experience and everything he said tonight was balanced and reasonable. i found nothing object jicksnabble in the regard to the and balanced the budget. i think a lot of the callers are viewing their own particular situations and perhaps not as
secretary clinton: what a great night. hello, nevada. it is so exciting to be here with you, the battle-borne, battle-ground dinner. this is the beginning of a great movement forward to make sure we have a huge turnout for the caucus and then we go on and win evada for the democrats again! cheers and applause]
>> you are the heart and soul of this campaign. now, i love you all, too. thank you! [cheers and applause] most of all, i want to salute and thank my friend, our leader in the senate, the pride of search life, harry reid! cheers and applause] harry deserves the thanks not only from his home state but from our nation for his decades of service. no matter how high harry climbs, he never forgot where he started from or who he is fighting for
and i have seen firsthand how committed harry reid is committed to work families. and to build the democratic party here and everywhere. and you have a slate of impressive candidates. y friend, congresswoman dina titus is doing such a great job for you. [cheers and applause] secretary clinton: i'm so proud to have her support and troduced me to a group and referenced an elvis presley song quick and that is what dina does every single day. and i want to really put my
support behind your next enator, katherine cortez [cheers and applause] katherine is so well prepared, so focused on what she can do for you in the senate. i just hope that everybody takes her as your high priority going forward. we need her in the united states senate. all the democrats running this year, they need your support and i will offer my support as well. right now, i am not only running for president but raising millions of dollars to help you build the infrastructure that you need to win because we are ll in this together!
and the next president is going to need strong partners to get the job done so we have to elect democrats up and down the ticket, because we have seen when republicans win. just look at what is going on here in nevada, they are undermining and puts at risk with teachers' jobs and students teachers. you have a republican congressman, mr. hardy, who said mr. whom any was right and people with disabilities and i society., a drain on you have an attorney germ who has made its mission to tear art hard-working immigrant
families and republicans trying to give more tax breaks to the superwelfare and today for the first time they succeeded in first time and to defund plnpln. i tell you what, it's a good thing we have resident obama: to veto that terrible idea! [cheers and applause] secretary clinton: i want you to stop and think for a minute. it's scary for them to pass that through the congress. in january of 2017, a new president is going to walk into the oval office and america can't afford for it to be a
recan that will rip away all the progress we have made. just imagine what they will do on the first day. they will repeal president obama's protecting immigrant families. they will repeal the tough new rules on gun dealers. that's what they would do the first day and get back to their failed agenda and stack the tax code for those at the top and and bust unions and set back working families, round up and port immigrants and and boy, if given the chaps, they will appoint more right-wing justices to the supreme court. and it could well be it could
get us into another costly ground war in the middle east. aagendaa. ir we have fought too hard. all across america, families rolled up their sleens and worked their way back to the financial crisis and here in nevada, you are hit. people lost their homes and jobs and took second jobs if they could get a second shift. your hard work has helped bring america back. we are standing but we are not running the way america should. we have a lot of work to build on the progress. we face complex challenges
around the world as we saw last night from north korea. too many families struggling trying to stay ahead. we need a president to make the job done and that means doing all parts of the job. keeping families safe and our ountry strong and tackling the strong and caring for a loved and here's heimer's what i believe. when families are strong, america is strong and america grows! en your paycheck [cheers and applause]
mrs. clinton: that is why i invest invest to in clean energy, like solar and geothermal and went. by investing in advanced manufacturing, modernizing our roads, bridges, airports. the nation that built the hoover dam can build a 21st century electric grid to power our 21st century economy and create so many new jobs doing it. [cheers and applause] mrs. clinton: i am the only candidate here tonight that has pledged to raise middle-class income, not middle-class taxes. i want to lower your taxes. [applause] by helping you with the cost of health care, college, caring for an aging parent. the republicans, what do they do?
they just promise more new big giveaways to the wealthy, at a time when the super rich and big corporations are already gaming the system. they should pay their fair share. under my administration, they will. no corporation should get rewarded for sending jobs or profits overseas. no wall street manager should pay a lower rate in tax than a teacher or a nurse. and if we want paychecks to grow, let's start by raising the minimum wage. let's make it easier for workers to organize and bargain. let's make sure that women to finally get equal pay for the work that we do. [cheers and applause] let's make it easier for parents to balance the demands of work
and family with affordable childcare and paid family leave. [applause] you, whenever i talk about this -- and i get pretty passionate about it -- republicans say, there she goes again, plaguing the -- playing the gender card. if fighting for women and families is playing the gender card, deal me in. [applause] i am proud to be running in a democratic primary with my opponents. they have a lot of good ideas,
and we share a lot of the same values. paleifferences between us in comparison to what we see on the other side. [applause] but your choice in the caucus really matters. l beginuary 20th, you wil the process of choosing a president who has what it takes to stand up to the republicans, to make a real difference for american families. a president that can get the job done, and not just on a few inches, but on all the complex -- a few issues, but on all the complex challenges we face. [applause] [cheers] [chanting] mrs. clinton: i do not believe
that we are going to raise income for middle-class families by raising taxes. i don't think we are going to ease their burden by making them pay for donald trump's kids to go to college for free. i don't believe that you can stop the trump companies and the big insurance companies by tearing out the affordable care act and a forcing america to start all over at square one. that plays into the hands of those special interests. i have been laying out plans that help families get ahead, stay ahead, and make the wealthy pay for them. hold corporations accountable. keep our families safe gun violence and terrorism. prevent the republicans from taking us backwards. i know how to find common ground. i know how to stand my ground. i will go anywhere to meet with anyone at any time. to find a path forward. that is what i have been doing for decades as first lady, as senator, as secretary of state.
that is how i helped create the children's health insurance program that covers 8 billion kids. it's how i help secure a treaty with russia to reduce the threat from nuclear weapons. you can also count on the to stand my ground -- count on me to stand my ground, especially to those powerful interests holding back american families. ask yourselves this -- if the republicans were portrayed, then why are hedge fund -- republicans were worried, then why are hedge fund billionaires already with running campaign at against me? why are the koch brothers throwing in everything they have to stop me? you know why? they know i will stand up to them and defeat their right-wing top-down agenda that is bad for america. we are not going to let it happen. [applause]
they know something else. they know i will stand my ground against drug companies that are gouging us with skyrocketing drug costs. against polluters poisoning our air and water. we will combat climate change, not deny it. against the gun lobby that fought every commonsense reform, even keeping guns out of suspected terrorists. if you are too dangerous to fly, you are too dangerous to buy a gun in america. [applause] i will continue to stand my ground against those who traffic and presidential in paranoia -- paranoiand prejudice in a against african-americans, lgbt people, anyone they can
terrorize. you cannot make our country great by killing our people down. -- tearing our people down. [cheering] remember, we have to work together and grow together. i want to give you 2 quick examples. first, we need comprehensive immigration reform with a path to full and equal citizenship. [applause] that this used to be a bipartisan issue, didn't it? yet not a single republican candidate, not one, clearly and consistently supports a real citizenship. -- a real path to citizenship. you are right donald trump calls mexicans rapists and drug
dealers. [boos] he says he wants to round up and deport 11 million people. senator rubio helped write the 2013 immigration bill. now he renounces it. we know this is going to be a difficult fight. we have to stand together and keep the pressure on. we have to reach out and make the case again and again and. remind people that comprehensive immigration reform can raise wages for millions of workers and add hundreds of billions of dollars to our nation's economy. we have to remind people that at tits heart, this is a family issue. if we say that we support families in our country, that has to mean something. hard-working parents should not have to prepare their kids for the possibility that mom or dad might be hauled away at any time. and if congress still refuses to aact, i will defend president
obama's executive action. i will go further. [applause] there are many undocumented people with deep ties in their communities who deserve the chance to stay. like the parents of the dreamers i met here in las vegas. i will fight for them. immigration private detention centers. that should not be outsourced. and family detention. we have better alternatives we should use. sure every refugee who seeks asylum has a fair chance to tell his or her story, especially children fleeing from a violence. -- from violence. [applause] immigration reform is a big issue that dominates the headlines. i want to give you an example of another problem that does not make as much news, but has as much impact on millions of families.
i think a president has to be able to deal with challenges as big as the world and as small as were kitchen table. everywhere i go across america, people share very painful stories of addiction and substance abuse with me. how many of you have a loved one who had struggled with this? just raise your hand, please. hampshire, in new i had a big townhall. i called on a young girl. she had been raising her hand. she told me she is living in foster care because her mother overdosed. she asked me what more i can do for kids and families in similar situations. the truth is, i think there is a lot more we can do if we do it together. we can invest in treatment, not more jails. better training for prescribers, easier access to anti-overdose
drugs and efforts that will help people with addictions end up in recovery, not prison. not long ago i saw a great example of what we can do. a woman suggested i go to a community program in reno called crossroads. it's run by the sheriff's office and catholic charities. they were tired of seeing the same people in and out of jail, the emergency rooms with no hope of breaking the cycle of addiction. so they said, let's try something different and build a safe place for people to spend the night with counseling and support. and some tough love. since 2011, crossroads has saved county taxpayers an estimated $20 million. [cheering] by keeping hundreds of people out of the hospital and out of prison. i love this.
i love it as a model. it's really america, isn't it? when we come together to solve problems, a sheriff and the priest sit down together and say, our people are hurting, let's try something different. we americans may differ and bigger and a stumble and -- differ and bicker and stumble and fall, but we are at our best when we respect our differences and work together. i know it' we all have to do our part. [applause] and grandparents, as neighbors and coworkers and citizens, we have to look out for each other. we have to strengthen our families, our communities, our sense of common purpose as americans. whether you are a dishwasher in las vegas, or a coal miner in kentucky, or in unemployed young
men in chicago, i want you to feel like you have a stake in our country's future. and that our country has a stake in your future as well. we can't forget that. no one should be left out or left behind. we are all part of this great experiment we call america, no matter where you are from or what you look like or who you love. i'm the granddaughter of an immigrant factory worker. and the grandmother of the most wonderful little girl in the world. [cheers] bill and i will do everything we can to ensure she has the opportunity to succeed. but i don't believe you should have to be the grandchild of a former president to share in the promise of america. the grandchildren of truck drivers and teachers, firefighters and housekeepers should have that house -- that chance too. that is what is at stake in this election.
what kind of country are we going to be? are we going to be defined by fear and resentment, or what president lincoln called the better angels of our nature? as president, i will be the first line of defense against the dangers we face. i will always have your back, but i can't do it without you. i need you. and you have a real responsibility, because you are the first line of defense. when you caucus february 20th, it's up to you to choose the right person to stand up to the republicans, protect everything we have achieved, keep america moving forward. please join me, help me fight for you, deliver for you, protect you! let's make a miracle all we know and can be. -- make america all we know and can be. goodnight!nd [cheers and applause]
mrs. clinton: thank you. ♪ >> c-span takes you on the road to the white house with best access to the candidates at town hall meetings, speeches, rallies, and meet and greets. we are taking your comments on twitter, facebook, and by phone. and always, every campaign event we cover is available on our website, c-span.org. ♪ [cheering and applause] sen. sanders: thank you. thank you. cheering]nd sen. sanders: thank you very much.
[applause] sen. sanders: let me begin-- [laughter] [cheering] sen. sanders: well, i'm trying to begin-- let me begin by thanking all of you in this room for your patriotism, for your love of this country, and for doing what doing, andricans are that is standing up and getting involved in the political process. thank you all. [cheering and ringing]
sen. sanders: let me give a special thanks to my dear friend harry reid and his wife landreth for the decades and decades of service to nevada and the people of our country. harry, thank you so much. [cheering] sen. sanders: let me just say, as you have heard from secretary clinton and governor o'malley, this country has come a long way 7 years.8 because of the leadership of president obama and vice president biden, but also because of the leadership of harry reid. thank you harry. [cheering and ringing] sen. sanders: we have come a long way since w bush left
office. bush left office, 800,000 people a month were losing their jobs. we had a $1. dollar deficit -- $1.4 trillion deficit. and of the world's financial system was on the brink of collapse. our republican friends, and we should not be too hard on them -- they suffer from the illness called amnesia-- [cheering] sen. sanders: they seem to have forgotten the conditions that they left this country in. but we are not going to allow the american people to forget that. we have made real progress.
proud of whatbe we have accomplished. --t, and here is the big but we still have a very very long way to go to create the kind of country we know we deserve. [applause] has gone down.nt but real unemployment today, counting those who have given up looking for work and are working part-time, is close to %10. unemployment is off the charts. -- youth unemployment is off the charts. we have to put the american people back to work. that is why i am fighting for a
trillion dollar infrastructure program to rebuild our roads, our bridges, our airports, and put 13 million people back to work. [cheering] sen. sanders: today in america, let's be clear, the federal minimum wage is a starvation wage. inple in nevada, people vermont, people all over this country are working 2 or 3 job s to try to pay the bills. it is not a radical idea to say that somebody who works 40 hours a week should not live in poverty.
we are going to raise that the minimum wage to $15 an hour. [cheering] today in america, millions of seniors and disabled veterans $12,000ing to get by on or $13,000 a year. you cannot get by on that. my republican colleagues think that amount is too much. they want to cut social security. the truth is, we have got to expand social security and pay for it by lifting the cap on taxable income.
[cheering] that music is really beautiful. [laughter] in. sanders: but, today class ofthe middle this country continues to disappear. despite a huge increase in technology and productivity, millions of our people are working longer hours for lower wages. and yet today, despite the disappearance of the middle class, we have more income and wealth inequality than at any time since 1928. and it is worse in america than any other major country on earth. it is morally unacceptable that
1% now ownsth of almost as much wealth as the bottom 90%. 10is wrong that the wealthiest families in america own more wealth than the bottom 50%. all newong that 58% of income created today is going to the top 1%. here is a radical idea. we are going to create an economy that works for working families, not for billionaires. [cheering]
as you have heard from secretary clinton and governor o'malley, the affordable care act has accomplished some very important goals. we have done away with the obscenity of the existing conditions. -- of pre-existing conditions. 17 millioned some more americans to the ranks of insurance. no small thing. but, and here is the but again -- we can do better. we must do better. [cheering] the united states today remains the only major country on earth that does not guarantee health
care to every man, woman, and child. in the united states, we pay the highest prices in the world for prescription drugs, and the drug companies can gdouble or triple the price of your medicine tomorrow. the time is long overdue for oins great country to j the rest of the industrialized world and pass a medicare for all single-payer program. [cheering] i am a number of the senate environmental committee -- a member of the senate environmental committee. harry, thanks for putting me on
those committees. in that capacity i can tell you that i have talked to scientists not throughout our country, but throughout the world. -- not only throughout our country, but throughout the world. climate change is real, it is caused by human activity. it is already doing devastating harm in our country and around the world. the koch brothers and the fossil fuel industry may not like it. but the time is now for the sake of our children and our grandchildren to transform our energy system away from fossil fuels to energy efficiency and sustainable energy. [cheering]
today in america, we have an economy which is rigged, in which the rich get much richer, while most everybody else gets poorer. but in addition to having a rigged economy, we have a corrupt campaign finance system. [cheering] and what that means is that it's result of the disastrous 5-4 supreme court decision, super pacs are popping up all over the political landscape, and millionaires and billionaires are in the process of buying elections. that is not what democracy is
about. that is what oligarchy is about. we are going to end oligarchy in this country. [cheering] here's the promise. no nominee of mine in the u.s. supreme court will get that position unless he or she is crystal clear that one of their first orders of business will b e to overturn citizens united. [cheering] i am very proud to be the only
democratic candidate for president who does not have a super pac. [cheering and ringing] i am extraordinarily proud that in the last 8 months, my received 2.5 million individual contributions. any campaign in the history of the united states of america. [cheering] the average contribution is less than $30.
verywe are proving in a significant way is that you can run a national campaign, a campaign that i believe will be a winning campaign, without being dependent on corporate money or the money of millionaires and billionaires. [cheering] today we have got to recognize a very unpleasant but true fact. i am the only candidate for president that will tell you this. and that is no president, not bernie sanders or anybody else, powersne take on the
that be in this country. no candidate, no president can do it alone. wall street, corporate america, the corporate media, the koch brothers, a campaign donors are just too powerful. that is the simple truth, and unpleasant truth, but the truth. that is why in my campaign what we are talking about is not just electing a president. we are calling for a political revolution. [cheering and ringing] what does that meana? ? what that means is that we won't
succeed as a nation all must tens of millions of people, many of whom have given up on the political process, many of them who no longer have faith in washington, many who no longer vote. if we are not able to bring those people, working people, young people, low income people, backing to the clinical process -- back in to the political process, we will not be able to transform america and create a government that works for all of us. [cheering] i am very proud that in this campaign so far, all over this country, we have had meetings bringing out over 450,000
people. that all over this country, young people and working people are now standing up and are fighting back against a rigged economy and a corrupt political system. [cheering] let me be very clear and a bit political here. all of us want to make sure that we defeat right-wing extremism, that we make certain that no republican becomes president of the united states. all of us are united to take back the senate. and we will do well all over this country.
[cheering] but let me be very clear. that result will not happen with establishment politics and establishment economics. democrats winhat elections is when we have a large voter turnout. [cheering] republicans win, as they did last year, when people are demoralized, when people give up on the political process. what we need in this campaign is energy, we need you, we need working people, we need a democratic party. [cheering]
party thatemocratic makes it clear to every worker in this country that we are on their side and are prepared to take on the billionaire class. [cheering] our job should not be simply to be running around the country, raising money from the wealthy. our job should be to bring working people together, in basketball arenas, in football stadiums, by the tens of thousands, to answer their questions, to mobilize them so that we have the fighting force we need to transform this
country. [cheering] but we will not accomplish that goal unless the middle class and working families of this country know in their hearts that we are on their side. and they will not know that we are on their side unless we have the courage to stand up to the billionaire class whose greed is destroying our economy. [cheering] havehat is why i introduced legislation that takes on the most powerful special interests in the united states of america. and that is the need to break up the huge financial institutions
on wall street. [cheering] as the people of nevada understand, wall street's greed and recklessness and illegal behavior created the worst economic downturn since the great depression. but a funny thing happened -- we bailed out wall street because they were too big to fail. 4 turns out that 3 out of the largest banks in america today are bigger than they were when we bailed them out. 6thurns out that the institutionscial
in america have assets equivalent to 60% of all the gdp in this country, issue 2/3rds of the credit cards, and issue 1/3rd of the mortgages. when you have a financial of financial -- a handful of financial institutions that are so powerful economically and politically, the only rational approach is in fact tyoo break them up and create i financial system-- a financial that works for small and medium-sizee businesse, not and island to itself that is only concerned with more and more profit. [cheering]
i am the ranking member of the senate budget committee. i will tell you what the republican budget is about. the republican budget is about voucherizing medicare, making massive cuts in medicaid, massive cuts in education, borrowing millions -- throwing millions of people off of health care, then giving hundreds of billions of dollars in tax breaks to the top 2/10th of 1%. [booing] that is a budget, and that is a political party that must be thrown out of office. [cheering and ringing]
we will not succeed unless we galvanize the american people. a muscular turnout goes up -- unless voter turnout goes up, not down. unless young people get involved in the political process rather than sit it out. what this campaign is about is rbg bringing millions of people into the political process in a way that we have not seen in many, many years. take to's what it will win in november. not only to retain the white house, but to regain the senate and to win governors chairs all over this country. iw ou would not be running for president -- i love my state of vermont and love being senator of vermont -- i would not be
running if in my heart of hearts, i believe that it was too late for establishment politics and establishment economics. [cheering] it is not easy, i know that. and it makes people very nervous when we talk about a political revolution. here is the truth. no change that has ever come in this country has occurred from the top down. it has always been from the bottom on up. we fought against segregation and racism because millions of african americans and whites stood together and said, enough is enough. [cheering]
combated sexism and made significant progress because women and their males allies said, women will not be second class citizens in the united states. [cheering] in the 1920's and 1930's grew to become a fighting and powerful force. because from the bottom on up, workers stood together and demanded the right for collective bargaining. [cheering] we have made significant progress in the struggle for gays rights. the gay community and their straight allies said, people in america must have the right to love those who they want.
[cheering] over the years we have made a lot of progress in creating a le ss discriminatory society. god only knows that we have a long way to go, but we have made progress. here is where we have not made progress. here is where we have lost ground. and that is the economic struggle. what that means is that while the very rich become richer, most of us are becoming poorer. it means there is an agenda in washington now, led by the republicans, that wants to cut social security and eliminate virtually every piece of legislation passed in this cou ntry since the 1930's which protect working people. moment in pivotal
american history. out moment is, do we bring people together to stand up and say loudly and clearly that this great government of ours belongs to all of us and not a handful .f billionaires that is the democracy that so many brave men and women gave their lives to defend. it is not going to be undermined by citizens united and super pacs. that is the struggle. and it is a very difficult struggle. taking on the koch brothers,
taking on the corporate media, taking on wall street is not an easy struggle. they have unlimited sums of money. they have incredible power. but we have something that they do not have. and that is when the people stand together, there is nothing that we cannot accomplish. that is what this campaign is about. thank you all very much. [cheering and ringing] ♪ >> more road to the white house coverage throughout the weekend on c-span. with seven republican presidential candidates scheduled to be in columbia, south carolina to answer on their solutions to the country's
problems. coverage begins live at 10:20 a.m. eastern, with jeb bush, chris christie, mike carson, mike huckabee, and senator marco rubio, as well as governor kasich. donald trump will be holding a rally in clear lake, iowa at 5:00 eastern. on sunday, planned parenthood will endorse the mcculloch president candidate -- endorse democratic presidential candidate hillary clinton. live coverage all weekend on c-span. students around the country are working on c-span's student documentary contest. tell us the issue they want the presidential candidates to discuss. through social media, we are following students as they produce videos. a canterbury schoolteacher tweeted, "8th grade students were excited to hear ben carson address and control."
a principal at middle eastern middle school tweeted "two ems students interviewed former u.s. attorney general eric holder. wow." "i was interviewed by students for their c-span product." a grand prize of $5,000. the deadline is january 20, 16. the winners will be announced march 9. for more information, visit our website studentcam.org. book tv has 48 hours of nonfiction books and authors every weekend on c-span2. here's some programs to watch for this weekend. saturday at 7:00 eastern, book duty is a the university of wisconsin with history professor william jones to discuss his book "the march on washington." >> this is movement that went to the core of people's beliefs on
what this nation should be. it changed a lot of minds, but it scared a lot of people too into positions of hatred. their commitments to inequality. >> at 10:00 p.m. eastern, "afterwards" looking at the life and political career of vice president dick cheney. the former white house secretary. >> no one on the right has attracted more vitriol from the left, more intense vitriol than dick cheney. with the possible exception of george w. bush or richard nixon. >> on sunday at 5:00 p.m. eastern, vice magazine contributor talks about her journalism, political art, and her latest book "drawing blood." >> i started writing personal essays. i only had about five pieces when i got the book deal. i have this delusional fantasy
that sense i have written a 200 0 word essay, that writing a 10,000 word book would be like writing a few essays, and it would not be that hard. ha-ha-ha. watch book tv every weekend on c-span2. television for serious readers. here's a look at some of our future programs this weekend on american history tv on c-span3. next tuesday, president obama delivering his last state of the union address to a joint session of congress. saturday and sunday at 1:00 p.m. eastern, we feature 4 state of the speeches by former president during their last year in office. saturday, jimmy carter, followed by ronald reagan. on sunday, george h w bush's final state of the union followed by president bill clinton. saturday morning at 10:30, miranda, playwright and star of the broadway musical "hamilt
on" takes a book achievement award. on road to the white house rewind, go back to the 1984 president campaign, and a debate between 8 democratic candidates in iowa. >> he has to have the trust and confidence of the american people. and it has to be on matters spoken in public and private. private promises and public statements being the same. it has to be for all of our people. >> for our complete we can schedule, go to c-span.org. with the presidential candidates in new hampshire, south carolina, and i want this weekend -- and iowa this weekend, what is the state of the race? in iowa, we are joined by the phone by stephen shephard, author of the political caucus. thanks for being with us. guest: good for being here. host: hillary clinton is leading in high what -- leading in iowa.
ted cruz is also leading on his side of the aisle. 10 things change? -- can things change? guests; those polls were all conducted before the holidays. pollsters take a break before the holidays. voters are not paying attention, they are traveling, they are worried about getting their christmas shopping done, cooking for their families. pollsters take a break. we will see in the next week a bunch of new polls coming out in both iowa and new hampshire. i would stress those numbers are old, they are from december. things always do change. that is why we expect them to. the candidates are working hard to make things change. candidates are not ceding iowa to ted cruz. bernie sanders is not ceding iowa to hillary clinton. those we talked to think these
candidates can still be challenged. the 24 days between now and the iowa caucuses is enough to mount a credible challenge. host: if secretary clinton and senator cruz are not best in iowa, what has the past. what could happen? -- past told us about what could happen? guest: things change up until the last minute. looking back 4 years ago with rick santorum, who basically came out of nowhere in the final month to win the iowa caucuses. in the final des moines register poll conducted before the caucuses, not only was he gaining. but in every day that paul was in the field, the 3-4 days, each day rick santorum was gaining strength to the point where he had passed by the end of the survey both mitt romney and ron paul. overall in the survey, he had
not passed mitt romney. you can see day by day him gaining strength. the key to winning in iowa seems to be getting hot at the end. which candidates are poised to do that, that's what it's going to come down do. that's lake breaking momentum -- that late breaking momentum in the last half of january. host: for arguments sake, let's assume that ted cruz and donald trump come in first and second respectively. it seems that the third-place finisher is the one candidate that will get a lot of attention. guest: that is true. the cliche is that you get 3 tickets out of iowa and new hampshire. that third person is going to be interesting. the pressure is on marco rubio to be that third person. then he can pick it to new hampshire -- pivot to south carolina and new hampshire,
states in which he is making a push. to portray himself as the compromised candidate between the establishment and conservative republicans. that said, he does not necessarily have a clear path to third place. ben carson, who was leading in iowa 2 months ago, retains and healthy share of the vote. 10% in the latest polls. he has a pretty committed base of supporters. insiders say a lot of his core supporters are still with him. he could finish in third place. chris christie is a name that you have not heard in iowa. he recently went up this week with his first tv advertisements. even though he is at 2% in the average of iowa polls, our insiders say he is mounting a challenge in iowa. jeb bush, who seems to have taken down ads in iowa, right
now he is in that conversation below cruz and trump. with carson and rubio and christie to do well in iowa. who finishes third, fourth, fifth, that will be just as important as who wins. everybody takes the show on the road to new hampshire and south carolina. those electorates can be very different. host: governor christie is back in iowa next week. on the democratic side, is martin o'malley making any inroads in his candidacy in iowa? guest: it is interesting. the first metric we will get on o'malley in 2016 will come out of iowa. late this week, nbc news announced the criteria of the next democratic debate in south carolina on january 17. they have set a threshold of 5% in the polls, either nationally
or in one of the early states. martin o'malley is not near 5% nationally or in new hampshire or south carolina. but he is at 5% in iowa. there will be a couple of more polls next week that will determine whether he gets into that debate. we talk about momentum. nothing stunts any possible surge of momentum like the public embarrassment of being excluded from a three-person debate. if martin o'malley can't get good polls out of iowa next week, which will measure his current liability, that may stop any kind of momentum before it even starts. host: this is the headline at politico.com. the current iowa front winners poised to win, but things could
still change. stephen shepherd joining us in washington, his work available online at politico.com. thanks for being with us. guest: thanks for having me. >> coming up this weekend, 70 morning after 10:00 a.m. eastern, we are live in columbia, south carolina taking part in the republican presidential debate. jeb bush, chris christie, ben carson, carly fiorina, mike huckabee, john kasich, and marco rubio. at 5:00, we are live with donald trump at eight rally in clear lake, iowa. at 6:30 eastern, highlights from the first -- the first in the west caucus dinner. featuring the 3 them aquatic -- democraticatic -- 3 candidates. >> you and i are part of a
living so creating mystery -- self creating mystery called the united states of america. at the heart of it is a very real and concrete thing. that is the covenant between us that says, in our country, you start where you start, but through your own hard work you should be able to get ahead. give your grandchildren and children a healthier and safer future. >> for more information, go to our website at c-span.org. >> as president obama prepares for his state of the union address on tuesday, he released this video on twitter. pres. obama: i'm working on my state of the union address. it's my last one. i keep thinking about the road we have traveled together these past seven years. our capacity to change for the better makes america great. our ability to come together as one american family and pull ourselves closer to the america we believe in.
it's hard to see it sometimes in the day-to-day noise of washington. but it is who we are. and it's what i want to focus on in this state of the union address. >> c-span's coverage starts at 8:00 p.m. eastern with senate historians and a congressional reporter looking back at the history and tradition of the president's annual message, and what to expect in this year's address. at 9:00, our live coverage of the president's speech, followed by the republican response by nikki haley. your reaction by phone, tweets, and e-mail, as well as those from members of congress. on c-span, c-span radio, and c-span.org. we will re-air the state of the union and republican response at 5:00 eastern. we would hear from members of congress with their reaction to the president's address.
republican presidential candidate john kasich holding a townhall meeting in exeter, new hampshire. congressman michael mccaul of texas on 2 terror related charges. of texas, calling on the arrest of two terror-related charges. and congressman ed royce of california discussing national security issues. >> now, republican presidential candidate, ohio governor john ll meetingds a town ha eter, new hampshire. he'll discuss balancing the pshire and new ham security. the new hampshire primary is 9th.duled for the [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org].
>> this is about an hour and 20 minutes. >> good evening, everybody. tonight, it's my pleasure to introduce governor john kasich and welcome you all to our town hall meeting. to like to invite you all stand and join me in the pledge allegiance. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under god, indivisible, with leadership and for all. should also begin by both embarrassing and welcoming my wife and daughter to the town hall meeting. if i don't, myse
mother will find out about it to me. won't talk got to know john kasich n 1996 when i was elected to congress representing exeter in the first district in new hampshire. budget signed to the committee and he was the chairman. from the first day i met him, i leaderis was the kind of that i wanted to emulate. he was tough. conservative. he was absolutely determined to balance the budget. he was unconventional, no question about it, but he was do things people to they didn't think they themselves could do. importance of the leaving something better for our children and grandchildren than what e found, and that's led him to lead the drive to balance the budget for the first generation in 1997. we cut taxes. we balanced that budget.
we reformed entitlements. e left no stone unturned, and there wasn't a single special interest to say anything about it. he did it, led the effort because he knew it was the right thing for the country and, of course, the people of ohio that .e represented he was a television star on fox, tell you. big. [laughter] and then he knew he had more work to do. he went back to ohio, ran for governor, and as governor in ohio, he has done the same d the government leadership that provided results. it's about not talking. the things for people you're representing. he balanced the budget and jobs in 350,000 new ohio. they have reformed entitlements.
they have made their healthcare system work better. they have privatized services sense, and have given power back to the local governments. that's the kind of leadership i have always respected in my public service life, and i think that's the kind of leadership america today. someone who not just makes a good peech, not just has ideas, but knows how to get things done, knows how to turn ideas into results. that's the kind of president i ant, and i believe that's the kind of president john kasich will be. ladies and gentlemen, john kasich. applause] gov. kasich: is this the most bizarre place you could ever imagine? it's friday night and you're all gathered like this. people, wrong with you huh? and we're not passing out canned hams tonight. we passed out and
town hall r our 50th meeting, but we'll have a surprise the next time. anyway, thank you all for coming. how about a round of applause sununu and his service. [applause] the of course, we have great gordon humphrey here, a blast from the past. where's gordon? stick your head in here. pplause] i want to really -- seriously, i want to thank you for coming, and i'm going to try to be short here and take some questions and i'll try to answer those short, and if both of those things happen, there will be miracles place.ing here in this i just want to tell you a little bit about myself because john did a beautiful job talking about the need to look at without and fix them, upset. to get people
you can't operate that way. so why do i do things that way? and i want you to understand. my father was a mailman. he carried mail on his back, and coal miner, and my grandfather died of black losing his was eyesight as he got older. tough family. most of them never graduated from high school. one of my uncles fought at iwajima. and it's a remarkable story of america. mother lived with us. she could barely speak english. she was an immigrant from yugoslavia, and my mother was a said, "johnny, tell it like it is and always make sure the place where you were is a little better off because of the fact you were there." i like it say she was a pioneer in talk radio. t, n the radio was broadcas
she would yell at the radio, and kenny, i don't know if you heard this story, but when they started to call in on radio, my mother and i would listen. i learned a lot from my mom, and we had two phones in our house. we had one in the kitchen and one upstairs in the bedroom. some of you will relate to this. when we made long distance calls, we had to time ourselves. remember those days? the young kids don't. they time themselves as to how long they're not on the phone, mother o one time, my heard this incredible argument going on, and she wanted me to hear it. amazing debate, so i wasn't in the kitchen. she went room-to-room and she finally burst into her bedroom, and i was the person on the phone. [laughter] arguing with the announcer. [laughter] foreshadowing, kitty. anyway, the town i grew up in was all blue collar. people worked in steel mills. my uncles, some of them worked in steel mills.
when the time came for them to retire, they'd just close the mill down. sound familiar? and so a lot of people in the country feel -- and i think degree, ave felt, to a that if you're powerful, if you are special interest, if you're rich, you get what you want and everybody else kind of gets what's left over. elected sincebeen i was very young. nobody in my family could ever figure it out and, frankly, i've een blessed and given a lot of opportunities. from mind's eye, i come there. i fight for people who usually don't have anybody to fight for them. e didn't get tickets -- i grew up in pittsburgh. we didn't get tickets for the steelers game. they were too hard to get. didn't even think about it. baseball game, my dad and i would go on labor day. ou know why we would go on labor day? it costs, but how many games do they have on labor day?
two. we'd sit in the right field leachers and the box seats, never dreamt about it. so i never want to tear anybody but i've also felt that people who play by the rules, god-fearing, you know, common sense need to have a voice. o i got into politics for one basic reason, to lift everybody, give everybody a voice and chance.y a a lot of people run away from their records. study my records, because it's a record of accomplishment, a record of together.ams nobody ever does anything great by themselves. you have to do things in a team, and i've been fortunate enough to have enough people come around to be part of something for all of us that's bigger than ourselves. in washington, john and i worked to balance the federal budget. why'd we do it? one, we didn't want kids to have to pay this $58,000 a kid, because that's immoral. put that on our
grandchildren? and the second reason is, if we balance a budget, we create certainty. if we create certainty, we can create jobs. job creators will make the decision to invest. my greatest moral purpose is to make sure that we have a job-creating environment. when i left washington after balanced and dget cutting taxes, the economy was zooming. trillion wn half a dollars of the national debt, and we had a balanced budget that isrs in a row, and not a movie in the theater that's a fantasy. it actually happen. and i left washington. the whole thing fell apart. nobody stood in the breach to say no. then i went into the private sector for 10 years, was having a great time, and then i felt service ck to public and my state was dying, and i don't need to get through all of that, but let me tell you where we are today. after five years, we have grown
private sector employment by 385,000 jobs. 385,000 families that have been helped. great? t it means going back to politics worked. they're running a $2 billion surplus. our credit is rock solid. our pensions are solid. but the other thing you need to know, is we've done better economically. if you're mentally ill, if you're drug addicted, if you're developmentally disabled, if you're a member of the working member of the minority community, we're helping you. because i believe as onservatives, and i believe as republicans, everybody must have a chance to rise. verybody -- not a gift, but everybody should have the opportunity to live out their god-given purpose. and i think opportunity is what it's all about, and i also think as conservatives, we have to be more comfortable in terms of we're 're for than what
again against, because ideas power everything. ideas are excitement. they're innovative, they're new, they're refreshing, and that's do.t we and as president, the formula that i've used, both in ohio and formula that, is a needs to be repeated. ommon sense regulations, balanced budgets, reduced taxes, simplify the tax code, get back to common sense, hire people who are going to make sure that they , not working for them. special interests, it's nice to hear you, but at the end of the day, we've got a job to do. so let me stop. polite applause, and then you can ask me questions. you got your hand up first. what is on your mind?
just yell audience: i have a question about paid sick leave. i have a chronic health condition and i actually have to take a year and-a-half off in college. i just graduated this past may. luckily, my parents could a year and-a-half but now i'm in the workforce. and even if my job is guaranteed and i take time off, i have to choose between, you know, health and finances, being able to support myself. what would you do for people like me? aknow it's not just myself as young person, it's people of all ages have chronic health issues. i don't know. what do you think we should do? audience: well, personally, i
think -- gov. kasich: because you're able-bodied, you play by the sick, you're not not in the workforce, and you're being paralyzed because you're not getting experience. that's a really hard problem. audience: it is. gov. kasich: what would you like to see? audience: well, personally, i would like to see, i think, workers' comp. i think i would like to see -- gov. kasich: well, we have workers' comp. audience: yeah, and i'd like to see both the employer and the employee take responsibility in this case. a couple of -- maybe a couple of . llars out of their paycheck gov. kasich: so workers' comp, if you work for a company and get sick, you get help, and our workers' comp in ohio. audience: yeah, i think just solid paid sick leave. i think i worry about that. i . kasich: the only thing would tell you, i'd like to think about it. the only thing i would tell you s, you know, we also have town halls with small business people. how many people run a small
business? you run a small business, and if i tell this guy he's going to more in tart paying tax taxes, he may have to either go out of business or lay people off, so we may have to think about what would be the way in which we could address it? i'd hate to stand here with the first question and tell you i don't have a good answer, but i don't think you want me to stand here and make something up, right. that's not but i want to think about it. you know, if you do work for a sick, we do you get have workers' comp. i want to go back to that. it was a total mess, and we have rebated, i think it workers't $2 billion in comp in businesses, and in particular, it helps the small people are d yet eing taken care of and people that are sick. anybody, who no fault of their own, who gets sick, has problems, is poor or whatever, and if they can't work, we're in. going to pitch am i right? that's the american way. in this case, this is even more
of a issue, because you want to go to work, right? nd you can't, and you're finding yourself in a tough situation. let me think about it. and if you have some ideas, we'd like to hear from you as well, okay. the onight, i may not know answer to some things, but what i do in my job is that i get going around -- like i'm to tell you one of the problems we have today. a 51--year-old man or woman that loses their job. where do they go? and i've asked my people to think about how we can retrain them, and how can we do it effectively? because, you know, there's only so many dollars to go around. so we have to create priorities, and then we have to think innovatively. can we train them? them w we can train through the community college but what if they don't have any money? can we begin to train them online? can we hook them into in-demand jobs that we know exist, with training that can help them qualify for those jobs? and is it possible for the
federal government to help a little bit for the states to come up with a program to all those people who have been isplaced in their jobs because of a changing economy from the 0th century to the 21st century. the key to solving our problems, the ones that are vexing, is to look them square in the eye and say, can we fix it? and if we don't have an answer, how do we turn it? how do we twist it? how do we think about it in such a way that we can develop a solution. if you're worried about who you're going to make mad, it ain't going to work. so you can't worry about that. if you're going to be in a situation where people are going to be angry with you because you did something, that's life, because i have to tell you, i've public office for a long time. for my goal -- and i have to let you in on a little secret. the republican party is my vehicle, not my master. --.y, the only person [applause]
the only person i take orders from is my wife, okay. [laughter] daughters are going to turn 16, they're starting to give me orders. not taking many of them. but the point is, looking to solve problems and that's what we try to do. thanks for asking the question. there.ir, right none of these microphones work. where's mr. microphone when we need it. remember that, when we were kids, huh? audience: i just want to respond to that real quick, and i have another question if that's okay. i'm 61. i had a stroke a year ago. i went back to school thanks to vocational rehab in new hampshire. i got retrained and certified in photoshop and other adobe gotucts, and a month ago, i a job. applause] i'm 61. gov. kasich: of course. you don't look 61.
well, you know, then again, i'm running for president. [laughter] audience: well, i've got friends that know i am. i just wanted to ask you this question if i could. renewable energy, company's got sweet deal in the 2015 spending deal, multi-year extension of industry tax credits, in exchange for lifting the ban on oil export. is there talks of a similar deal in the future that would impose a carbon tax in exchange for a reduction in the corporate income tax. would you support this type of horse trade if you become president? gov. kasich: i get nervous about the idea of a carbon tax. nervous what i get about, is that we'll have this tax. with this tax, it's going to go up and i promise everything else is going to go down. or by the way, we're going to have a budget bill, and we'll tax increase ttle and the rest of it will be spending. take a guess at what happens. the tax goes up and the spending -- yeah, the spending goes up and the taxes -- everything goes up,
that's exactly right. look, what i support on tax reform is i want the corporate down to 25, ome because right now, it's so high, eople keep their profits in europe, or they're moving out of the country to get lower taxes, taxes we can bring the down to 25 and not double tax invest in nies will rather than europe. there's triple dollars stacked. 25 like to get it down to and get companies to write off investment and plant immediately, so they can be more wages.tive with higher on the personal side, i'd like the top rate down to 28, 25, 10, 15% capital gains text, and then i would freeze all federal regulations for one year, force congress to vote on regulations going forward to approve them. we don't want bureaucrats making laws and then to plan to get us to a balanced budget.
be? would that you take medicare from 7-5% 5-3.th, medicaid from freeze all nondiscretionary, freezing your priorities and $100 billion more on military because we've got to rebuild our military, at the same time, .e're reforming the pentagon i did all that in about a minute and-a-half and that was pretty good. [applause] what does that do? what that does is it sends a message to job creators. know what's so great? a said he's 61, he had stroke, went through rehab, and job.a everybody was so excited about that. that's why jobs are so important, because i bet you were frustrated, and now you feel set free again, don't you? you're strengthened as an individual. it's good for the family. so if we can do the things that i'm saying, and by the way, they're all practical. they're not like -- i could come
here and promise you a zillion things but i'm not going to do that because it ain't going to happen, but what i just proposed can be enacted, particularly the corporate tax reduction which we desperately need in this country and i think we can get bipartisan support. way, y the nothing -- nothing big, fixing the border, fixing social security, dealing with all the entitlements, nothing can get done if there isn't some measure of bipartisan support, okay. it won't happen. [applause] and obamacare is a perfect example. you see what, it's not acceptable. notence: doesn't mean it's done. gov. kasich: well, it may be done, but here's the thing. unpopular that it's going to be repealed. if i'm president, it'll be repealed and we'll replace it. but what i'm saying is, you know, you're not going to fix -- reagan fixed social security with tip o'neal. when john sununu and i were
involved in balancing the budget, we changed medicare and you never heard a peep, because democrats icans and work together, you call off the demegogary. when people demagogue and fight off the people, it's hard to get anything done. that doesn't mean you need a massive amount of bipartisan support, but it does mean you -- semblancemblence of it. and it doesn't require anybody having to give up their principles, because i want to go back to the fact that we're americans before anything else. you probably haven't noticed, divided ve a pretty ineffectual congress, i want to let you know. [laughter] news break, right? that can be healed, if we will just respect people who don't think the way that we do, and we build the issues around things creation, like the morality of putting our children in debt. it's not acceptable. so, sir, i want to thank you for your success story.
great.'s [applause] right here. audience: welcome to our state of new hampshire. thank you for coming. gov. kasich: i live here, man, more than you do, what are you talking about? [laughter] if you haven't met me three times, i don't know you. people in at i tell other states. there's 1.2 people who live in 1.2 ampshire, i've met million twice, and i've got three more times to go. [laughter] you, nce: my question to my biggest concern is that congress is a complete mess. nd part of the thing that's a mess in congress is that they're there.ched will you support term limits for all congress? gov. kasich: absolutely. absolutely and absolute power corrupts. it's not going to happen, okay. let me tell you, the reason is you've got to have a
constitutional amendment, but i'm for it. of course. we have it in ohio. guess what they do in ohio. they're in the senate, then they go to the house, then they go back to the senate. then they go back to the house, okay. [laughter] our big problem is jerry mandering, where they draw districts to provide safe republican and democrat districts and the members become more extreme because they don't want to have a primary and that pushes people farther apart. can you follow what i mean by that? you always worry about a primary. nobody can get to the right or left of me. that's not good. sir, we're going to need to look reform, all finance these things. but let me get to the bottom and john sununu said it well and i'm not sure you heard him on this. probably did but let me reemphasize it. it's all about character. do you think you can legislate morality? timberland today, you know, got a great jacket, by the way. [laughter]
timberland today, and i said, you have an ntitheft policy here at timberland. but your policy isn't going to stop people really from stealing. going to steal because they have ethics. and the problem with congress is in, they want to stay. and so they're afraid to take a angry so they you get thrown out, and there's a term when you're a congressman. what it is? is there life after congress? because when you get to be in congress, you're a big shot. am i right, kitty? events. to go to all the you're the front seat, you get to meet the president. i mean, seriously, that's the works, and people like that. anybody would. remember is ave to when we get elected to public a ice, we are not there for lifetime job and you have to take risks and you have to remember why you're there, because if you serve for years and you didn't accomplish anything, what was the point? what , let me tell you
i've done, and john will attest to this. sometimes i used to have people who i couldn't -- didn't want to vote on my budgets. because when you vote on a budget, it means you're taking something from somebody and else.g it to somebody one guy had eight or nine kids and he lived in california. make meaid, john, don't vote on this budget. so i went to him. i was stand nothing an elevator. i said what do you got, eight kids? nine. you got nine kids. you come from california to washington, you're not with your family. why are you here? and he stopped for a minute and looked at me and he said, okay, on the budget. hear what i'm saying. people to perform at a higher level than where they normally perform. you look at belichick. you and i could probably suit up for the patriots this weekend and we'd win a game because he'd
probably make us play better. i'm serious. you think about all the great studied.e've ever think about reagan. think about harry truman, teddy roosevelt. they were able to have that -- winston churchhill. ever ever ever give in. have your children study with what he did in great britain. from just dying. it's because of leadership. it wasn't because of a law. i'm not telling you we don't need laws, and i'm for the term for these other changes, but at the end, we have to have leaders that get people to perform at a higher level and have guts and realize their in fix iing america. and wherever you are. so throughout my career, and it's why i'm doing this again, i can't explain it to you. some the lord has given me
special little blessing to get people to be part of a team to get results, and that's not arrogance. i'm humbled by the fact that i could be in a leadership position and see things happen, ut you have to work with people. you have to encourage people. that's what you have to do. and so the congress itself, it as to start fixing problems, because the world looks at america and says what the heck is wrong with you? you can't seem to do anything. it's all about government shut-downs. it's all about yelling and screaming. it's all bipartisanship. and i love my country. can we fix this? if i'm president, you can count on it. i promise you, you can count on it. [applause] but i'm coming back here, if i'm president, and i'm going to tell you why. because you're going to speak with a loud voice to that congress, and you're going to say get it done. that's what reagan did to get his work through.
people, and the people have to be part of the solution. yes, sir? fixing : you mentioned america. thank you. you mentioned fixing america, concerned as i'm sure you are, about money and politics. people look at marco rubio as potentially that g the nominee, and concerns me because he is getting the biggest contributions from the coke brothers, and i'm wondering if you think that his contributions rom the coke brothers and big oil affect his energy policies? gov. kasich: well, i can't thinks.he way he he can only judge the way he thinks. for me, you can give me money, youthank you very much, but ain't going to get squat for it, other than the chance to give me an opinion, okay. it works.t the way but let me just say to you that, gain, it's back to character, isn't it? but here's the beauty of new hampshire. because i don't have all the money and i don't have all the
billionaires, and i don't have all that. but i'm like a little engine that just keeps chugging along, here.m rising up and here's the beauty of new hampshire. you've got that 1.2 million. do you know how much i love these town hall meetings? them? w why i love because you get to see who i am. i put my best out here. i'm fine.n't work, i mean, no, i won't be fine. [laughter] that. what i mean by you don't care whether i'm famous. you don't care whether i have money. none of that -- does that matter to you? i don't think it means a whip. you judge at somebody, and this is where people get launched. renamed shire could be cape canaveral. ou launch people into the consciousness of america. so if you're worried about that, i've got a good candidate for you, me, okay, just so you know. [laughter] ma'am, right back here audience: my name is martha
lafleur, i'm a retired educator newdo advocacy work for vip hampshire. i want to thank you for taking a stand on social security. know it's an important issue. i realize as a governor you had your k very hard to get initiatives through the state house. once you're in the white house, ow will you get your plan through congress? and finally, if you make a priority list, where would social security be for the future? where would you put that? gov. kasich: first of all, the in on why i'm close to aarp ohio is for this reason, our medicaid program, which serves elderly, went from a growth rate of 10% in my second budget to 2.5% and not rolls was taken off the and not one benefit was cut. did you hear what i just said? it's unbelievable, okay. not because i was so good but because i had a good team. et me tell you one of the
biggest things i did. the nursing home industry, which is a good industry, but they got too much of what they wanted in the legislature. they were some of the highest reimbursements, and they basically said if you were elderly, you are going to end up be nursing home and not able to stay in your own home. say knew i was going to that. they spent money to defeat me program. to derail my to make a long story short, ohio has dramatically changed the mix, because i beat the nursing home industry. now, if you're a senior citizen and you want to stay in your home or you and your husband want to stay in your own home and you're able, you can get the help to stay in your home and stay there rather than being put in a nursing home, okay. [applause] and it's been a dramatic change ohio, and it's really, really cold. social security has to be at the top of the list for this reason. f we don't fix social security
in the year starting around 2030, social security benefits will have to be cut by a third. that's not acceptable, because there's a lot of people that can't have that happening. so what are we going to have to do? well, what you're really going o have to do is the wealthier seniors -- and i don't want to throw a number -- i could throw a number out. i'm not sure this number sticks, but $100,000 in retirement income, you will get less in social security so all the other seniors down the line will get their full benefit, and that's what we're going to have to do, and that is a very hard thing to do, to get done, but we can get it done, because we're not going to shaft the seniors in this country. so i do have to work through a legislature and get this done, but i also had to work through bill clinton, who was the president of the united states, when i fought to balance the budget. o you have to get people to understand what the problem is. you've got to be open to some of their suggestions, and then you get it done, and that's exactly -- so social security has to be at the top of the list, because we can't wait. this has to be put into play, because the demographics of the
retiring is ople beginning to outnumber the people who are working and the numbers don't work so we have to fix it. way in the back, yes, ma'am? audience: my name is nora rousseau, and i'm very frustrated over what happened ith social security, and my understanding, if i'm correct, fromat congress took money the social security funds for other programs or for whatever reason. just wondering -- well, first of all, i would like to have congress take a pay cut and put that money back for seniors. i can'tustrated because imagine -- gov. kasich: i'll let the congressman know your feelings. [laughter] audience: please. that's why i'm speaking now. gov. kasich: that's good. audience: also -- now i've lost my train of thought. gov. kasich: i'm sorry. i interrupted. on social security, why did they borrow. audience: there are many people today who are in their 60s who for whatever reason, whether it replacement, they're not
well enough to work until they're 70 years old to be able retire. i just don't get it why older what have to pay for congress did years ago over the years and work, you know -- wait need it when they retire sooner. so that's my question. gov. kasich: okay, let me explain to you. by the way, for the four years in which we balanced the budget didn't as chairman, we borrow from social security, which was really terrific. and by the way, that debt clock stopped going up. i am told it stopped going up. in fact, it went down because we aid off a half a trillion dollars of the national debt, which is really good. million went up 30 every five minutes. gov. kasich: right now? right now. you, ma'am, y to here's the situation. the social security money came in because of social security taxes. there was more money coming in benefits.out to pay the government borrowed the money to run the government and
ious in the treasury that have to be redeemed. anding is my underst some of them are absolutely being redeemed. in other words, it's not like paid back.t get the problem we have now is the number of people who are retiring, particularly with the baby boomers, is beginning to who work. the people the numbers don't add up. why there has to be a fundamental change in the program. but it's not like that money doesn't get paid back. it was an iou, and it was the government using it to fund education, agriculture, whatever it is. but it has to be paid back. and those bonds will be redeemed, because you can't just say they don't matter or they don't count. that way. work in terms of the retirement age going higher and higher and higher, and there's a point at which it gets to be too high, have f course, you can early retirement, or you could disability.
audience: statement] ble the situation i'm in gov. kasich: yeah, well, you're on ready to be retired . cial security audience: [indiscernible] gov. kasich: okay. and you've done very well, okay. and what i'm saying to you is, it really is all about the numbers, but here's the tragedy this. in 1998, not like i'm the know it all here, okay, i just had good people. i had offered a social security held thehat would have seniors harmless, the baby boomers would have started at a slightly lower level, and the young people would have started -- they would have less, but they were going to be given 2% in a private account that would grow with the growth of the economy. that plan never was voted on. it's like going to the doctor. the doctor says you have a problem, and then you show up 16 years later and say okay, doc, what are we going to do now?
so i did my job, but that solace in there's no that, because we have a problem now, and we've got to fix it, that 've got to make sure those who don't have those resources -- and by the way, that retirement-age scale is up over time, but the idea that we're going to move it up to 75 or 80, you know, we have to be of the fact of what you just said. is too : i think 70 much. gov. kasich: i don't think we're going to see it come back the other way though. i just don't think it's in the cards. but i'd like to get the program fixed. yes, sir, right here. audience: i have a question regarding what's been going a question what's been going on in this country for 40-odd years. our industrial base and, consequently, good-paying jobs. how do we get some of those jobs back in some of the factories unning and making things here instead of bringing them from china, japan, and all over the place? terms sich: you mean in
of them leaving? well, there's good news. jobs are actually beginning to onshore. i have a big investment, $4.5 billion investment from thailand, at east 100-00-0000 invested -- $100 million invested in ohio. i have people who invested in the steel company in ohio since 've been in, and we have whirlpool bringing their jobs chinese we have a company that is creating 1500 windshields in dayton, ohio, and those jobs are going into a factory that was abandoned by an auto company. this is why people in ohio were optimistic because we're seeing it happen. why is that happening? well, it's happening because we ave low energy costs and our transportation costs from asia into here are high. so we're now starting to get a competitive advantage.
the other thing that's happening is we can use technology to create advanced manufacturing where you use -- i went to an auto plant. provides partsat to the auto companies. i went in there. they were all blue collar workers. they don't ever touch a piece of metal. everything is done with computers. and all learn how to do it, these are just regular folks. and i said, well, how's the pay? pay is up. how's the jobs? the jobs are up. o it is very possible using advanced manufacturing to hniques to be able to -- have high productivity and to be able to have some of those jobs coming back. folks, we have to do, is we have to be also be people for young the jobs that exist today. some of them will come back and not going to re come back. and so what do we do about that? well, we need to have an education system that's
beginning to train people for jobs that exist, not train people in a vacuum, okay, so we are available. and i keep mentioning my state. i'm the seventh largest state in the country. we're not a bucket shop. $63 billion. it's like a version of the minifederal government. what we do there could be done in the country. what we're doing now is introducing young people to occupations and now we're beginning to tell them, these are the jobs that are available. this is what it takes to get one, and this is what it pays. i just read yesterday that in ohio, we have 240,000 job openings. guarantee you, you have thousands and thousands of job openings right here in new hampshire. but we don't have the people who have been trained to take those jobs. so why aren't we looking at what the jobs are that are available and training people for those jobs instead of training them for something that doesn't exist? does that make sense to you?
[laughter] yeah, that makes perfect sense, doesn't it? so let's do it. let's do it. let me give you another one. guidance counselors in high they do hy don't guidance counseling? why do they spend their time onitoring the lunchroom or rolling the basketball out? [laughter] you know about that. this is like a church service tonight, amen. [laughter] amen. but the fact of the matter is, these are not that hard to do, but you have to be creative. i'm going to give you another idea. nd this is something that should be done all over the country. this one is a little bit farther out there. business,e the medical i'm talking about profession. you've got all these people, they've got to do billing, you've got peop people -- phlebotomists that take blood. you've got all these jobs out there, and they play pretty well. so i'm asking the medical people curriculum her a
online which you can take. say you work at mcdonald's and you're stuck. you take the curriculum if you pass it. you're guaranteed an interview for one of those jobs, and you have the skills and you've been trained to take that job. ow, that's called everybody working together. these are the kinds of things in we have to think about america today and our education system -- and by the way, i want o move all the education programs back to new hampshire, i mean, with the money. right now, we have 104 education programs. i'd like to break it into four buckets and send it back to new hampshire, ohio, nebraska, and let us run our education programs. flexible --. [applause] how old are you, young man? audience: 16. gov. kasich: what do you want to be when you grow up? audience: biomedical engineer. [laughter] echlt
gov. kasich: he said he wanted to be a biomedical engineer. old. 16 years put 'er there, kid. [applause] listen, you're 16. you get out, you go to college, then you do four more years. i should be running for re-election. you'll be rich. can i get a campaign contribution from you? [laughter] but here's the thing. to be a biomedical engineer. take esn't he be able to five hours a week or six hours a week and go to a medical a medical laboratory? audience: he can't. gov. kasich: pardon? audience: he can't. gov. kasich: okay. but we need to be pushing this more in all of our schools, because people don't know about these programs. if he goes ng man, out there, he's going to get so excited about what he wants to be. when i was a kid, i always wanted to be a lawyer. thank you, lord, for not letting that happen.
[laughter] but here's the thing. think about how great it would have been had i been able to a k for a judge or work for law firm, and understood it. and i would be more excited about learning. another one.ou how about a kid that's going to drop out? what's that kid want to do? cars? o work on engines, he loves video games. why don't we get them somewhere where they can work on that and create an individual path to graduation from high school because if you don't graduate from high school in the 21st century, these are all the xciting things that we can do if we just put our minds to it, and we think creatively. know what, talking about get everybody -- yeah, let's do it. that's what's cool about being a governor. yes, young lady audience: i live in exeter and my name is elaine.
i was just looking in the ewspaper the other day and i read that somewhere around 75% of americans acknowledge that climate change is real and i'm just wondering, you know, with the same scientific consensus behind climate change as do ution and gravity, why you think pretty much lots of republicans deny this basic science? why do you think that is? gov. kasich: well, i think human beings do effect the climate and i'm a big supporter of solar and wind and geothermal and efficiency, but i want all of the different sources. i saw seabrook today. i'm for nuclear too. this.r all of [applause] so i think sometimes, you know, sometimes -- i really know -- i they have an opinion why do that. but i'm not going to tell you, because it's not good. republican in the primary, but i'm for -- i can't tell you how they think, but i can tell you how i think. i think there is something to climate change, but i think we
ave to take our time to have remedies, and the remedies are things like efficiency and solar wind, and i think the other part of it is, let's not go so ast that we throw this kid out of work or this gentleman out of work. it's got to be a balance between a good environment and economic growth, which we can achieve. if you work at it, you can achieve it. the on't want to worship environment, but we have an obligation to protect it. i think sometimes -- i've had a little battle with my legislature over the issue of renewables. and they tend to think, you know, it's subsidized. it's a government program and all of that. well, you know, what we have to just p these things, so i have a little different view of what we should do in that area and i think we have to be it, okay.bout yes, ma'am, right here. audience: i like your message. this summer is when i first saw you on tv. i was actually in ohio on a a rest , and we were at stop, there was a plaque on the wall saying --
this is really great. looking at my picture in a bathroom, right. [laughter] this is really something audience: it was positive, and i had good because feelings about you this summer. and i never kind of saw you. i always see trump or somebody else. but i thought if i come tonight and i still feel the same, i'm going to vote for you, and i feel really -- am i doing? how audience: you're doing great. you e a leader, strong and have a positive energy. gov. kasich: you know what they say you have to do in new hampshire? could i please have your vote? [laughter] see that? you have to ask for their vote. knee.on a bended audience: i'm going to ask a knowion that i still don't the answer. i feel you speak for americans. i feel like you're not kindsmatory and i see all of inflammatory things said, and i think in the world now with
he terror, i think we need to ratchet that down, and i feel like you would be a great, leader that was not inflammatory. with the you deal terrorism in our world now. i have 10 kids, i'm concerned. kids? ich: 10 audience: yeah, nine adopted. l, one is gov. kasich: how are they doing? audience: two are not doing well, and eight is fabulous. a percentage. by the way, my husband is the hair of the chemical engineering department at unh nd he has a specialty in biomedical. gov. kasich: let me tell you something. okay.is how it works, kid, so now you get her phone number, okay. and then you call her and you say, could i talk to your husband, and then you go down they do. you see what audience: and the other thing i wanted to say is my husband is or solar, but he is for nuclear, because he adds the
numbers up and he says nuclear is the way to go, but politically, it doesn't work. gov. kasich: yeah, it is. extended the license at seabrook. it's coming. they're building one in the south. but kid, get her number. [laughter] o here's the thing, look, i spent 18 years on the defense stuff, the defense committee. and then after 9/11, donald rumsfeld invited me to a meeting of the former secretaries of defense and i in that meeting we overed the lapses that had in listening on technology, and i asked the secretary if i from bring a group in silicon valley to help them with technology technology, and for two or three years, that's exactly what i did, i would take groups in there. and these groups, these were brilliant people who solved a lot of problems so i've been around for a long time. you have to be cool and calm and delibera deliberate, basically, on everything. you don't go kind of waving your
arms and getting all worked up and using fireplacy rhetoric, do it on purpose in a limited time. * fiery. so let's talk about something i'm very concerned about tonight. very worried about north korea, and i'll tell you why i'm worried about them. them, butanicked about i'm worried about them. we have been kicking the north korea problem down the road for multiple administrations, because it's a very hard problem. seoul, korea, has 10 million people. they launch missiles into seoul, korea. it's unthinkable. so what do we do? well, one thing we should always our mind is ack of the concept of regime change. you know, what do we do to try to foster that? because it's not a given that they have to be there forever. but just -- it's just a thought, and you don't want to be -- frankly, i don't even want to be talking about it out loud here, but you want to consider that. now, what else do you do?
well, we know that we have big problems with the chinese. are ow that the chinese cyber attacking us, or their friends are, stealing our secrets, violating a lot of things, and we have to have a cyber command. we just have are to create one tell people to we can ack with cyber, defend ourselves, harden our sites, and secondly, we have an offensive capability. you, y the way fwe catch you are a criminal. you are a hacker, a criminal, and we're going to have come after you. you don't have to yell. i was in a debate and somebody said what would you do if the russians flew into a no-fly zone. one candidate said, i'd shoot their plane down. ou know what i'd say, if they fly in the first time, they could fly out. but if they fly in the second time, they won't be able to fly out. do you see the difference? it's a difference in the way you talk. back to the north koreans, we have to let the chinese know, even though we have disputes
with them, that they are not our enemy, and we expect them to straighten that regime out. leverage.ot the they need to fix north korea. know that john kerry last night apparently said something about north korea. if you embarrass the -- said something about china. china, it's alls about face saving. you get nowhere. so why don't you just tell them quietly, and you say this is what we expect of you and these are the things we'll do and i want to know what you're going to do. and in addition to that, we able to sure, to be intercept ships and planes out of north korea that could be carrying very dangerous materials or very significant echnology that can be translated into material for a weapon of mass destruction. do you understand what i mean by that? alongcase bomb, something those lines. it's very, very serious. reassure the o
south koreans and the japanese with probably a missile defense system, if china doesn't act. but you don't have to panic and threaten. have to you can be very, very calm about it. ukraine.we need to help they want to be free, give them what they need to defend themselves. we putin this is what expect. don't be going into europe. don't be going m and thinking invade nato countries, because that's just not going to happen. we're not going to tolerate that, and i don't have to raise my voice to you. i'm just telling you what i expect. and then that's what america used to do. reagan would say, you know, soviet union, we win, they lose. he didn't have to raise his to e, except when he went hat wall, and he said mr. gorbechauv, tear down that wall. it.idn't have to yell he meant it and they knew it. in the middle east, isis, i give
bush incredible credit for pushing sadam out of kuwait, having a coalition of as europeans that got that done and people said he should have gone all the way to baghdad. i'm not going to baghdad because if i do, i'm going to end up in civil war and george i deserves enormous credit for that decision. and isis must be destroyed with the coalition and we need to let the regional powers sort it out once we have some stability, and our sraelis, they're friends, stop kicking them. you've got something you want to say to them, say it to them privately. [applause] raised my voice. you don't have to raise your voice. firm.ou better be you better be tough, and you better know what you're doing, and i'm going to tell you, you ant to be president of the united states, and you think you're going to have on the job experience? me? ou kidding by the way, for the last seven years, we've been saying how did fromect a one-term senator illinois to be president with no experience?
a ghost ship.ning gov. kasich: oh, we do, i haven't checked it out lately their experience. ma'am, what i would say is, cool and calm, no red lines, unless you mean it. it takes sophistication, and inally, coordination with our allies on intelligence. the final thing i want to tell ou is our joint terrorism task forces, which are headed up and cover this state and my state and states all across the country are headed by the fbi, the homeland security, state and local law enforcement, and they that go out and disrupt these plots. they're the ones. they need to have the resources and they need to have the tools that they need to be able to safe.s the lone wolf, we just seen in philadelphia. he only way you can stop it, they've got to pick up something, from the neighbor, from the family. we all are our neighbor's keepers. did we know that? we? dn't forget that, did and we've got it keep our eyes open. not paranoid, just determined,
because that's the way we. so yes? you, young man, yes. audience: so i'm a senior in at the ool right now academy down the street, and i'm orried about the cost of college. you know, some of the schools $50-70,000 a are year, and i feel like what my family is going through right at the costs look or what a lot of middle class families are looking at right spot to be in,gh you know, not -- just making nough to not qualify for scholarships, but still not making enough to be able to pay wondering what s you would do -- what we could xpect under your presidency to help with tuition. gov. kasich: good question. first of all, let me say a couple of things. and i don't know about you, but with my kids, i have one daughter that says that she school in this far away state. i said what school do you want
to go to? i says, well, i don't know, just want to go there, okay. [laughter] i know a girl who had a full scholarship to indiana university. to turned it down and went vanderbilt at a cost of year.0,000 a i don't think she's any farther ahead for the fact that she did that. so there's a couple of things to think about. when you're in high school, you ought to be taking college also ought to get yourself remediated. i don't know, you seem pretty smart but if you need remediation, because most of -- about 30-40% of our students when they graduate from high school and go to college have to take remedial math and english when they get to college. take it while you're in high school. get it completed. and then when it comes to the school, i hate to say something radical here, but maybe you go to community college for a couple of years. you have now cut your costs in you go to if community college for three years, which is what we're going
to push through in ohio, you cut your cost in 3/4, and you do your >> then there is responsibility on our leaders in university and community colleges. the biggest cost of higher education is not teacher salaries. it is administrative overhead costs. get them under control. then, for people who bring up these debts, think about two things. a business can have incentives to pay off your loan or you can have community service that can work some down. ,'m going to suggest to you just go where you can afford it. 50 thousandh dollars worth of debt. maybe you have some
scholarships. be careful. you don't want to start that far in the hole. we have to get schools to figure how to control their costs and take that college credit. you have college credit plus where credits are transferable. use it. [inaudible question] out the it: they give grants. nobody has been focused on the cost. i hired a commission of people who were businesspeople that'll to the cost. let me give you examples -- [inaudible questions] mr. kasich: 20 years ago you got a loan from a bank. you didn't get a loan from the federal government.
the bank would say let's talk about this. a lot of those things have been withdrawn. you haves on both ends to keep the cost down and you have to figure out another way to get that degree. when did you graduate? i prefer to hire people that have degrees in something. maybe i'm unusual. that.ust think about the only thing you have to go through his ohio state university. we know that. >> would you get the federal government out of the student loan? mr. kasich: i don't know. it sounds like something i would have to say yes to but i have to
figure out what is involved in that. what i would tell you want the federal government to get out of, the welfare programs to come back to new hampshire, we write our own welfare rules. i will medicaid to come back. i want education to come back. the other one i want to come back, transportation. here is how it works. you fill out your tank and you pay federal gas tax. we send you, everybody sends that money to washington to a committee of politicians and they decide what to do with the money. after they decide they send the money back. do you think they send back more or less? in my state they wanted me to build a high-speed train. this was an exciting proposition. it was the only train i could think of that i could run faster than. 39 miles per hour. i said no thanks.
don't, i would send pennies to washington to maintain the interstate and then let the states keep the bulk of the money they pay, keep it in new hampshire. fix your bridges. you can reduce the tax if you wanted to. have the former speaker and more resources. you will could actually told. that is another program. when it comes to the student loans. i've been a privatization person but i have to sit down and think of the implications. thing, the present of ohio state decided to sell or to lease the parking garages and surface transportation. he was opposed by everybody in the university community. billion forhalf $1
releasing those assets. which go to scholarships. a half $1 billion. why does the university -- why are they running parking anything? their job is to teach this kid. how about looking around and doing health care with other people? beingout back-office shared? have to think differently. an online courses. having more professors that actually can speak english. that would be a novel idea. >> i have been sitting here looking at the sign. it says a strong america is a safe america. tell us what your thoughts are and why that is up there. mr. kasich: i don't know. i haven't seen that sign before. no. [laughter]
if you don't have a strong economy you can't have strong defense. if you have a strong -- will not have the defense you want if you don't have the money to pay for it. i look at a couple ways. strong economically. strong militarily. leadership. when you are strong economically it helps you to be strong militarily. when we can't solve problems we look week. we have to stop this nonsense. we have to solve problems, shift power and money back to where we live. build a stronger country. remember this. determination. they knock you down. you get back up. you put them wrong. understand that is what america is about. that man had a stroke. he was knocked down and he got back up. god bless you all.
>> with the president candidate in iowa, what is the state of the race where the first votes will be counted? we're joined with stephen shepard. thank you for being with us. stephen: good to be here. leadingry clinton is and i'll and ted cruz on his side of the aisle. >> one thing about both polls is they were conducted before the holidays. pollsters take a break. voters are not paying attention. they are traveling for the holidays. they get their christmas shopping done. they take a break. we will see a bunch of new polls as we look later in the
nominating calendar. from numbers are all old december. things always change. candidates are working hard to make things change. cruz.re not ceding to ted think thats and iowa these candidates can still be challenged. the it is enough to mount a credible challenge. not sureretary clinton bets, what are the bed -- what has the past told us? >> one thing that is clear is things change until the last minute. if you look for years ago with rick santorum who came out of nowhere to win the iowa caucuses, he in the final poll
conducted the week before the caucuses, you can see not only was he gaining at that point relative to his previous position but every day that paul was in the field. santorum was gaining strength to the point he both mitt romney and ron paul. overall he had not passed mitt romney but day by day he was gaining strength. the key is getting hot at the end. which candidates are poised to do that? that is what is coined to come down to. the latebreaking momentum that's going to be here in the last half of january. for arguments sake let's assume ted cruz and donald trump come in first and second. it seems to me the third-place finisher is the one person is
going to get a lot of attention. >> that's true. get three is you tickets out of iowa. that third person is going to be interesting. the pressure in a big way is on marco rubio so he can pivot to new hampshire and south carolina , which are three states in which he is making a big push. to portray himself as the compromise candidate between establishment republicans and conservative republicans. he doesn't have a clear path to third-place. still maintains a healthy share of the vote. 10% of the vote in the latest polls and has a committed base of supporters. they say that a lot of his
supporters are still with him. yous christie, a name haven't heard in iowa. he went up this week with his first television advertisements. our insiders say he is mounting a challenge. jeb bush, who has taken his ads down but he's been time there. belowin that conversation ted cruz and donald trump, with christie and rubio to do well in iowa. who finishes third, those are going to be just as important as who wins. everybody takes the show on the road to new hampshire and south carolina. >> governor christie is back in iowa next week. there are three candidates, martin o'malley. is he making any inroads?
>> is interesting. get isst metric we will going to come out of iowa. criteriannounce the for the next democratic debate in south carolina january 17. they have set a threshold of 5% in the polls nationally or in one of the early states. oris not near 5% nationally 5% in new hampshire or south carolina. in the average of the five most recent polls. a couple more polls will come out to determine whether he gets into that debate. we talk about momentum. nothing stuns a surge of momentum like the public embarrassment being excluded from a three-person debate.
if he can't get some good polls out of iowa next week which will ,easure his current viability that may stop any momentum before it starts for him in iowa leading up to the caucuses. >> this is the headline at politico.com. wonders caution things could change. thank you for being with us. >> thank you for having me. toadesident obama has the -- legislation to recall president obama has vetoed legislation to recall the health law. his veto message was read on the floor of congress. president house of representatives, i am returning
here with my -- without my approval h.r. 3762 which provides for reconciliation pursuant to section 2002 of the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2016. herein referred to as the reconciliation act this legislation is not only repeal parts of the affordable care act but would reverse the significant progress we have made in improving health care in america. the affordable care act includes a set of fair rules and stronger consume brother texts that have made health care coverage more affordable, more attainable, and more patient centered and it is working. about 17.6 million americans have gained health care coverage at the -- as the law's coverage provisions have taken effect. the nation's uninsured rate now stands at its lowest level ever and demand for marketplace coverage during december, 2015, was at an all-time high. health care costs are lower than expected when the law was passed
and health care equality is higher with improvements in patient safety, saving an 7,000 lives. this has changed the country for the better, setting it on a stronger course. the congressional budget office estimates that the legislation would increase the must remember of uninsured americans by 22 million after 2017. the council on economic advisors siment -- estimates that this exemption in health care coverage could mean more than 900,000 fewer people getting care, people having trouble paying other bills due to higher health care costs and potentially $2,000 in more additional debt. this would cost millions of hardworking middle class families the affordable health coverage they deserve. reliable health care coverage would no longer be for everyone. it would return to being a
privilege for a few. the legislation's implications extend far beyond those who would become uninsured. for example, about 150 million americans with employer-based insurance would be at risk of higher premiums and lower wages and it would cause the cost of health coverage for people buying it on their own to skyrocket. the reconciliation act would also effectively defund planned parenthood. planned parenthood uses both federal and nonfederal funds to provide a range of important preventive care and services, including health screenings, vaccinations and checkups to millions of men and women who visit their health centers annually. long-standing federal policy already prohibits the use of federal funds for abortion, except in cases of rape or incest or when the life of a woman would be in danger. by eliminating federal medicaid funding for a major provider of health care, h.r. 3762 would limit access to health care for men, women, and families across the nation and would
disproportionately impact low income individuals. republicans and the congress republicans have tried to undermine the affordable care act by voting to repeal basic protections that provide security for the middle class. members of congress should be working together to grow the economy, strengthen middle-class families and create new jobs because the harm this bill would cause to the health and financial security of millions of americans, it has earned my veto. >> republican leaders to not have the vote to override the veto. the house has approved a motion to delay the veto until january 26. next, michael mccaul of texas
washington journal live at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. >> is president obama prepares for his state of the union address he released this video on twitter. >> i'm working on my state of the union. my last one. i keep thinking about the road we have traveled together. great.hat makes america our capacity to change for the better. coming together as one american family and pull ourselves closer to the america we believe then. ins hard to see sometimes the day-to-day noise but it is who we are. it is what i want to focus on in the state of the union. >> c-span coverage starts at 8:00 eastern with betty coed in on congressional reporter the annual message and what to expect in this year's address.
our live coverage of the president's speech followed by the republican response by south carolina governor. plus your reaction by phone, facebook, tweets and e-mails, and those for members of congress. our state ofe-air the union coverage in the republican response starting at 11:00 eastern. also, live on c-span 2 after the speech. we hear for members of congress with their reaction to the president's address. >> next, chairman michael mccaul speaking about the arrests of iraqi related arrests. he called on the senate to overhaul the security vetting of iraqi and senate -- syrian refugees. this is 25 minutes.
the chairman of the homeland security committee. today in a federal prosecutors in texas and california indicted to iraqis for providing material support isis. these are to iraqis became into the united states through the iraqi refugee program. emphasize -- i have highlighted in the past how much of a threat i believe the syrian refugee program is to the safety of americans. i call upon the united states senate to pass legislation introduced by myself and others of the committee, and mr. hudson. legislation as soon as possible. this is an issue of safety to the american people.
we have to iraqis that came through the refugee program, now indicted for providing material support isis. andtravel to syria to train come back as a foreign fighter. if this is not enough evidence as to why we need this legislation passed i don't know what more is necessary. enough, i don't know what is. we've had dozens of cases of other iraqis who have come in under investigation and we have two in kentucky that were tied to terrorists organizations. isis in its own words have said they want to exploit the refugee program to infiltrate the west. we now they have attempted to do this. mr. clapper has confirmed they have already attempted to exploit this program to get into
the united states. we know two of the paris attackers exploited the refugee program to get into europe from kill peopleurope to in paris, france. there are other members of the committee that i would like to turn this over to. we will have time for questions and answers. i have been booked on this in the sensitive environment but now that these indictments have come out publicly, i think it's time to tell the american people the real story about the refugee program and what a threat and how dangerous it can be to the safety of american lives. hudson.ichard one of the co-authors of the syrian refugee bill. i want to thank the chairman for his leadership on this issue.
from the beginning of this process will he began work on legislation to deal with this, we wanted to be careful about the town. careful about killing with the scope of the problem, to avoid hyperbole, to do it in a responsible way. the legislation we brought to the house floor said simply we are going to pause this process unless and until the security experts the president has appointed to verify we have proper screening in place. the refugee process is the hardest way to get in the country. we don't need to add any more to this vetting process. what theignored testimony of the fbi director who said in the case of syria particular you can't prepare a background when you can't talk to third parties, when you can't
do paperwork. we can query until the cows come home and we won't find anything. there is a problem we doubt with any responsible way. that is why you sell two thirds vote in the house of a vetoproof majority of approving this bill. i call mr mitch mcconnell to ring this to the floor as soon as possible. the american people deserve this. i'm asking arsenate colleagues to address this issue today. thank you. >> i'm buddy carter from george's first congressional district. i want to applaud law enforcement for making these arrests in identifying these individuals. there are a couple of things. this points to a greater problem that we have identified in the house, that we had before
legislation to correct this. we know our vetting system needs to be honed up and improve. by the safe act we have done that. the syrians and other terrorists -- the syrian terrorists and terrorist groups have made it clear they are going to act on the generosity of our country to try and intrude on us. no one responsibility of our government protect our citizens and homeland. we are stepping forward in the house. we have done that with this legislation. it is time for the senate to do that part. time is of the essence. it needs to be done now. let me applaud law enforcement left made these arrests. we need the senate to move forward. we need them to act on this legislation so we can do our part in congress. >> i want to thank chairman mccaul and our representatives
for this bill. i would like to thank him for his vision to put together a task force to investigate foreign fighter travel and appointing me to that. we have been investigating the possibility of foreign fighters getting into the united states. we saw we were possibly moving into a new era of terrorism by our enemies. in paris, france, we saw that. if you consider paris it was not a random attack by locals radicalized over the internet. it was a well orchestrated, well conducted military operation for all intents and purposes which actually held operational security, which was amazing. the only way to carry out such a military style operation is to have highly trained operatives in the country and it is best if they are recognized as citizens or at least residents of that country. the refugee resettlement program
was going to be exploited by our enemies and it is a perfect opportunity to move those operatives into our communities and give them the constitutional protections of a permanent resident of this nation would have which makes it more civic old for law enforcement to track them. we have entered into a new era of war on terror. and must be active sizable we're going to be reaping a difficult situation against our nation. it is time for the senate to move. it is time to put political correctness aside and move on behalf of the american people to make this nation safe. i'm ryan zinke you. i'm a former navy seal and former deputy commander of special forces in iraq. i can tell you what we face as a triple threat.
it is not political hype or overblown. we face a border that is seamless. we have a southern border we are not in control of. 200 50,000 people that come across the border every year, what would make anyone think that children cannot -- children harboring isis materials, terrorists, and cannot come across? the me have travelers. we know 5000 people that hold an eu passport have fought a long isis. alsoeds of americans have fought a long isis. we know that. that is not high. ype.e why would anyone not want us to that refugees? the president called out the republican caucus by saying we were fearful of women and children.
san bernardino should give him pause. the terrorists come in all shapes and sizes. i would like to say terrorists wear bright red uniforms, and children aren't part of it. my experience on the ground in iraq tells me differently. we know that at least 50 children are under the direct control of isis. bringing individuals in here, refugees, it's not that we don't want refugees. we don't want unvented refugees. we run through the database and the file is empty, what does that really mean? , theere is no database file is going to be empty. it is incumbent on a great surety,o know with some not 100%, but those that come
into our country are not terrorists. terrorists, and all shapes and sizes. sympathizers. it is not just the ones that would pull the trigger or a night the ied. it would provide assistance, that is all part of what we face today. thankfully chairman mccaul has prioritized this. ,he members that voted for its this is bipartisan for a reason. our responsibilities to make sure america is safe. when mom brings the kids to school i want to give her a surety it is safe. thank you, god bless. >> we will take any questions you may have. topic -- [inaudible]
the number four i foreign fights is expected be 35,000. what does this tell us but the effectiveness of the strategy? mr. mccaul: i question what is the strategy? i don't think the strategy is working. that number was 25,000 last year . it went to 30,000. today the number is 35,000 foreign fighters from 100 different countries. studysk force behind me this for a year, came up with a report and the big threat we found was 5000 foreign fighters with western passports, which is why we passed the visa waiver program. and the hundreds who travel to the region, many web come back
to the united states. one is now indicted. they got through the iraqi refugee program. a foreign fighter. you can argue which is worse? they are both terrorists being radicalized over the internet as we have seen happen time and time again in the united states. as waseign fighter reference is the military trained isis fighter that can conduct a sophisticated operation like in paris. that can happen in the united states with foreign fighters in the united states. i want to commend the fbi for their work in getting these individuals off the street. they are ticking time bombs. how many ticking time bombs are we going to bring in in this program without a proper vetting system in place? we are not asking for much.
we are asked with the american people want. by ther vetting process united states government before they bring in these refugees. the most dangerous part of the world. rock that is the capital of isis. before a we bring in syrians as refugees we believe they need to undergo a proper vetting process and they need to be certified at the highest levels of the united states government. they don't pose a threat to the security of the united states. these individuals, it's important to note came into the united states as children. we hear a lot of hype about women and children. these individuals came in as radicalized,sibly and then one traveled back to the region and came back as a foreign fighter. it is cases like this that i get
briefed on every week that i can't talk about. it is time the american people know the truth of what the threat is. >> they were obviously screened before they were brought in. it demonstrates the point that you can't get it right all the time. it demonstrates the point that the vetting process needs to be enhanced. before we start bringing in more refugees. if these guys got through the crack's, how many more are out there? how many more of these 10,000 going to bring in before we have a proper system in place? that is what my concern is. i don't know if they were radicalized before they came in or after they came in. they were radicalized terrorists. they the intended to do us harm.
[inaudible question] has beenl: i think it stated once they are here they have all the protections of the united states constitution. we have due process and can't just avail people for no reason. we do not monitor refugees once they come into the united states. that is why we believe this is urgent before the we bring in the 10,000 syrians to put a proper vetting system in place before we bring the men. -- them in. a have the full protection of the united states constitution. [inaudible question] mr. mccaul: the visa waiver process was in a unanimous bill.
i view the syrian refugees as a threat but the idea that you have 5000 isis trained foreign fighters with western passports to me was a huge threat. a huge security gap that needed to be fixed. we fixed it in that legislation. i was disappointed to see the secretary because we put iran and there is a well. basically saying if you travel to iran, you have to apply for visas. he was trying to get around the law with a business exception. that was clearly not the intent of the bill. we didn't have that in the law. [inaudible question] mr. mccaul: it was in the omnibus bill. it was my hope and intention we were going to pass it. i was disappointed to see this
thatne of the top issues the administration had taken out of the omnibus bill. they have threatened to veto on this bill. despite the fact that we got an overwhelming number of my colleagues to support it on both sides of the aisle. that is why we are calling on the senate today to take action. we can afford to waste. refugees are coming into this country as we speak. >> what credit does the existing program get for helping law enforcement? existing refugee program allow these individuals into the united states. why credit the fbi for taking them down. i credit the fbi for taking these two off the streets to protect the american people.
i credit the fbi for arresting 70 isis followers over the last year. that is more than one per week in the united states. safer,ople say are we what is the threat to the homeland? numbers don't lie. these are going up, not down. the threat is increasing, not decreasing. -- i have been briefed. he appearsnt in time to be a very radicalized individual who shouted the killing of a police officer in the name of islam. once again we have a radicalized individual trying to kill law enforcement.
when you look at the internet the unitedming into states every day, 200,000 tweets per day, the message is clear. kill military, kill police officers. , thismine judgment individual is carrying out these directives, these orders out of iraq and syria. i think this is a very -- one of the most important issues in counterterrorism today. currently the terrorists can communicate in darkness. even if we have a court order. we need to shine i light on the communications. if you can't see what they are saying you can't stop it. the reason why we didn't see paris is because they are
communicating in the dark space. this needs to be fixed. i actually apply the ministrations efforts to sit down with silicon valley, with federal law enforcement and try to work out a solution to this very dangerous problem. using the dark space to perpetrate activity that needs to be fixed. i'm proposing with senator warner a bill to form a commission that will be comprised of experts from both federal law enforcement intelligence community and from silicon valley to report to congress with a solution for this very grave threat. [inaudible question]
mr. mccaul: you know, these to god in three vetting process where we have intelligence on the ground. in syria we don't have proper intelligence on the ground. that is the core of the problem with the syrian refugees. we'll have the data to that them. until we can have them properly vetted, we believe putting a pause on the program is in the best interest of the safety of the american people. as mr. carter stated my allegation is to protect americans first. we taken refugees. hundreds of thousands of them. this is a population that comes
out of the highest thread area in the world. before we start bringing in men that we can properly that and have our senior official sign off and certify that they don't pose a threat to the security of the united states. >> in our legislation we didn't tell the fbi director how to do a background check or what process to put in place. they are the experts. the 10 thousands that comment will be much different in makeup than the 10 thousands they intended to bring in. we can't find any information. you may never be able to come here as a refugee. that may be the consequence of it. if there is a hole in the bucket you turn off the spigot first then you fixed the bucket.
the spigotoff thi first. >> it's important for the mecca people to understand the challenge. that is why we are focusing on it. this isn't just a standard refugee program where we are given temporary sanction. it is a refugee resettlement program. the ones we bring in our given social security numbers and public benefits. they become permanent u.s. residents. and they become permanent u.s. resident. that is why it's so critical that the ones we bring in we know are going to do no harm. they are integrated to the community and giving can't intrusion of protections, which makes it much more difficult for law and was meant -- law enforcement to do their job, and foroo, applaud the fbi
doing the work they did here with the challenges they face. onthe bill places the burden , but you need accountability. by simply stating that we went through databases -- again, there was nothing in the databases. if i went through everyone in this room and set a database, you would be surprised what you would find. our current system we know is not appropriate for adequate. we are going to hold the agencies accountable and making sure experts look at it and go through a reasonable vetting process that gives some assurance. we need to hold everyone accountable, including congress, but i think it is absolutely the right course of action and pause, stop, figure out what we are doing now, figure out the holes in the program, and then come to
solutions to make sure that we do have some a surety. i think that is wise and prudent. narrator: next, house foreign affairs committee chairman ed royce of california discussing national security issues. in a pentagon briefing with general john kelly. after that, republican presidential candidate john case it, holding a town hall meeting in exeter, new hampshire. narrator: coming up this weekend, saturday morning a little bit after 10:00 eastern, form inive for a columbia, south carolina. taking part are republican presidential candidates, former florida governor jeb much, dr. ben carson, new jersey governor chris christie, carly fiorini, former arkansas governor ohio huckabee -- former arkansas governor mike huckabee, and
florida senator marco rubio. sunday evening at 6:30 eastern, highlights from the first in the west caucus dinner in las vegas, featuring the three democratic presidential candidates -- former secretary of state hillary clinton, vermont senator bernie sanders, and former maryland governor martin o'malley. >> you and i are part of a mysteryelf-creating called the united states of america, but the promise of the part of that mystery is a real and concrete ring, and that is the covenant among and between us that says in our country, you start where you start, but through your own hard work, you should be able to get ahead, should be able to give your children and grandchildren a safer, healthier, and better future. narrator: for more schedule information, go to our website, www.c-span.org. booktv has 48 hours of nonfiction books and authors
every weekend on2 c-span -- on c-span2. here are some programs to watch for this we can. history professor william t jones discusses his book, "the march on washington." jones: this was a movement going to the core of many people's beliefs about what the nation should be. minds,change a lot of but it also steal a lot of people to their position as a patriot and their commitment to inequality. narrator: at 10:00 p.m. eastern, fox news correspondent james rosen, who looked at the life and political career of former vice president cheney. on the right has attracted more vitriol from the left, more intense vitriolic from the left with the possible exception of the men he served in the white house, george w. bush, or richard nixon.
sunday, talk about journalism, political art, and the book "drawing blood." >> i started out writing personal essays. i only had five published pieces when a got the book deal and people really liked them. i have this delusional fantasy that since i had written a 2000-word essay that writing a 100,000-word book would be like 2000-word essays, and that would not be that hard. >> "booktv," television for serious readers. california congressman ed royce talking about security threats. he says iran is that biggest national security threat. he also discussed isis, russia, and u.s. leadership around the
world. this is just over an hour. >> can you all here? some system is always our biggest challenge. >> good morning everybody. we are starting on time for once and i'm pleased to welcome congressman ed royce chairman of the house foreign affairs committee. republican of california. we have an hour to talk about national security, the plans ahead, all of the challenges we face, all the solutions you have in mind and the president's state of the union next week. i'm not going to take another second, except i would like to welcome mrs. royce. i'm delighted to have her here. over to you. mr. royce: state of the union is
coming up here. the seventh state of the union and we have had seven years now of policies that focused on the befriending our enemies and distancing ourselves from our allies, ignoring our allies and the consequences of that, i would just give one example. if we think back to 2005, there was a historic opportunity in iran to are are are are have ar chance at reaching out to the people of that country who had gone to the streets after a stolen election and many of you remember the early broadcasting you saw, that young woman on the street who was shot by the authorities. and the con see consequences of a society, 2/3 of the people wanted a western style democracy and just had been robbed of an
election. and we had the president make his strategic calculus not to do the reagan thing. not to reach out in support of the people. but instead to decide that the engagement would be a long-term engagement with the eye tolla. and -- ayotollah and we saw a situation was made to embrace the muslim brotherhood, the muslim brotherhood that had been funded partially by iran but distance ourselves from egypt, from the people of egypt. and the consequences of these strategies was to leave us in the middle east in a position, in my opinion, where whether it was the jordanians, the israelis or the gulf states, people no
longer trusted the judgment of the administration and that's important because that means people no longer necessarily take our counsel. they begin to take things into their own hands or they begin to adopt a new calculus in terms of who the regional head is going to be based upon the assumption that we have now tilted toward iran. and this reason it takes on a new urgency. in the last few weeks we have seen a series of steps by the iranian regime in which you had violations of the u.n. resolutions with respect to two missile tests now, in which you see the firing of a rocket near the coast of the uss truman, our carrier. we have seen another american hostage taken hostage.
we have discovered recently of attempts to hack into a dam outside of new york city. i remember when we discovered the efforts here by the iranians to attempt to assassinate cafe milano. the ambassador from saudi arabia and now you hear iran openly speak of toppling the government of saudi arabia after already seeing their activities in bahrain and yemen where they did effectively topple the government. the question is, who is watching this? not just our allies all over the world but watching our failure to respond to these actions. and given that, i think it explains a lot in terms of the position we're in around the world. on the foreign affairs committee that i chair, we are attempting to reach back to the old bipartisan consensus that
america had in terms of strong engagement overseas something the a.e.i. supported. we need u.s. leadership. we cannot be in a position where our policy is one of constantly backing down. we have to have a policy of more backbone, not a policy of backing down and that's the crux of the problem today. host: you have a lot on your plate for the committee. i know you have been talking about what to do about iran specifically. you have been working with your ranking member, mr. engel and you introduced a bill on north korea's missile test. that is a nuclear deal at the time touted by bill clinton as the model how to come to a nuclear agreement and now we have an agreement with the
iranians. what are you thinking about what can congress do? mr. royce: during that original framework agreement i remember debating the chief negotiator not only for the north korean agreement but also for the iranian agreement. and i would just make the point that we had an example of what could deter north korea. in 2005 we had a situation where you had banko delta asia, a discovery by the treasury department that $100 bank notes were being counter fitted.
this gave the undersecretary the authority to go forward. he sanctioned that activity. and he gave a choice to the bank of ma crmpomp w and other banks that served as the conduit for the hard currency. they had a choice between remaining in the international banking system or being cut off and they could bank with north korea. they made a decision against banking suicide and all decided they would freeze the accounts for north korea. what were the results? we discovered afterwards that for example, the missile production line that the north koreans ran, they couldn't get the hard currency they needed to buy the black market gyroscopes. it came to a complete halt. more importantly, not only was the dictator not able to pay his army or his secret police, wasn't able to pay his generals. that is not a good position for
a dictator to be in. and as a consequence every meeting after that started with one question on the part of north koreans, when do we get the money and the hard currency. unfortunately treasury was not left in the position of making the key decision on this. unfortunately, that decision was made by the state department and they lifted as part of the negotiation in the hopes that north korea would come back to the table. the legislation that i have offered which will come up tuesday will take exactly that policy from 2005 and put it back into law. we will put that bill on the president's desk with strong bipartisan support. it passed unanimously out of my committee. and this is the approach that will work because you need consequences.
the idea of strategic patience which is how the administration defines its current strategy with north korea means patience while north korea goes forward with test after test until it fully develops its icbm program and its delivery capability and right now they could hit the united states. we don't want them to succeed. put them on the cone of those icbm's and threaten us. host: has the administration ta taken a position on that legislation? mr. royce: i haven't heard. i'm hoping that the strength of the vote behind it changes their calculus with how to deal with north korea. host: you defined a mechanism that the financial spigot was closed and now opened and now several nuclear tests.
we are about to open the financial spigot on implementation day with iran. what do you see the options for the congress to address the violations that you described of the u.n. security council resolutions and the threats that iran is posing in the region? mr. royce: i'm going to try to move legislation that will address those issues, but i would like to revisit the discussion that i had with the secretary of state, myself and elliott engel in which we advance legislation based upon stuart levy's work that would give him a choice compromise on his nuclear program or financial collapse and that legislation had strong bipartisan support.
i go back to the post-world war ii these is that we had in the united states. we put that bill together and we passed it out of the house of representatives with a vote of 400-20 and our request to the administration is that they allow that bill -- this was in a prior congress to come up in the senate. but instead the administration did the calculus and felt that they had to extend an olive branch. our argument was well, at least have this in reserve. if you are negotiating with north korea, let's have something in reserve for which there would be consequences if they do not follow through. allow us to bring the bill up in the senate. clearly we had more than enough votes for a veto override in the house and 65 senators that had shown an interest in the approach we were taking. the bill was blocked by the administration.
as a matter of fact, as i recall that session, no foreign policy initiatives came up in the senate because the senate leader at the time, reid, was concerned that this would be attached to it and would get to conference or it could get to the president's desk. i think this was an absolute blunder. and i think we've got to get back to the issue of whether or not there are going to be consequences, one of the things we were assured of if we went forward with this agreement, it would be enforced and a secondary argument that was made on the floor of the house of representatives is look, there are already u.n. sanctions in place. we'll enforce those if we see a violation of either the issue of icbm testing. we have had two violations and what happened? the administration began to move
forward with some some partial sanctions, informed us in congress and as soon as there was pushback from iran, they pulled it back. also, we were assured that there would be no lifting of sanctions against those who were involved in terrorism. you know the irgc and several banks in iran that have funded the icbm program that the iranians run as well as terror. our point is why aren't we sticking to the letter of the agreement? why do we continue to fall back? we put legislation out yesterday from the committee to address some of these issues and we will continue to push forward. but it is incumbent upon the commander in this chief in this country to lead when it deals with the national security of this nation. and we haven't seen that leadership. host: i want to come to the question of that leadership and authorization for the use of
force. before we leave iran, i want to ask you what your take is on the flair up between saudi arabia and the other gulf states and the iranians over the execution of nimr. mr. royce: here's one of the unfortunately consequences that the administration has tilted towards iran. what that means is that they are less likely to take our counsel. so when we give advice now, we frequently find -- for example, the iranian kuds forces helped orchestrate the takeover in yemen of the shia militia there. and a decision was made inry had along with other capitals to put together an force and try to push the iranians out.
and you will notice that we were not included. egypt, saudi arabia, other countries in the region are increasingly making decisions on their own without our counsel. and i think part of that is they now lack the trust and the judgment of the administration with respect to anything dealing with iran. and the other consequences of this, by the way, it makes it harder for us to get solutions to other problems when sunni and shia begin to separate because of the consequences, again, of actions where had the administration originally in 2008, i guess it was, 2008, was the iranian green revolution --
had we led then, we might have a different situation right now on the ground. when they feel strongly that an election has been stolen and you don't speak out and you don't increase the passions to 86%, which is what you could have done with radio free europe, radio liberty, if you don't take reagan's view on this that it's our responsibility to lead, also with public diplomacy, which we could have done effectively by broadcasting into iran in support of those efforts in an effective way, and now we're in this situation, it is very hard to untangle the lost opportunities. hard to get the confidence back in egypt when they've seen the embrace of the muslim brotherhood. this is the challenge we face in this theater.
danielle: you just brought up a whole series of things. public diplomacy, which brings also in russia. i don't want to leave the middle east until we talk about the authorization use of military force. i know you support the notion of an authorization. there was a lot of back and forth between the administration, which didn't want to give language to the congress and the result is that we've been operating in what amount to a military -- mr. royce: we're operating under the 2001 and twee -- 2002 authorization. danielle: correct. mr. royce: what i support is the authorization of use of military force that will give our commanders the flexibility they need mountain field. one of the things we need, though, in all of this is the commander in chief to be a commander in chief. one of the things we need as we move forward on this is a commander in chief willing not
to tie his own habbeds and the hands of whoever follows him into office but instead to be dedicated not to a containment policy with respect to this but destroying isis. let me just speak to that issue for a moment because when isis came out of raqqah in syria and began its assault across the -- well, across northern syria and across the border into iraq, there were calls from the pentagon to use u.s. airpower in the same way we had used it in -- back during the first gulf war when kuwait was invaded. you will recall when kuwait was invaded, the united states took a position that those 42 divisions were going to be obliterated and we did that with 118,000 sorties.
118,000 sorties took out those armored divisions. and the question we had at the time to the white house was, they're moving with toyota pickup trucks, you can see them from the air, why not use that strategy and remove isis before they ever take fallujah or before they ever take mosul, town by town, city by city? this was month after month after month when we held hearings on that and somehow the administration sat in a state of paralysis when isis could have been destroyed before they were embedded, before they were recruiting on the internet from all over the world, before they were selling the concept that they were indestructible we could have taken them out from the air.
let's take to the next stage. then they finally on the yazidi mountain, after they had taken a bank, we had a young captive speak before our congress, before our committee and explain to us what happened to her. she said, all of the men were killed, the girls, women were sold. i was bought by an american. i was a concubine by an american who was recruited by isis a few years ago on the internet. he explained to me as a yazidi i was an apostate and that's what happens under a just system. if you're not a believer in the
isis, you know, strategy -- isis cause, you're an apostate. she said, why won't you arm the yazidi men? why won't you arm the kurdish men and women? by the way, 30% of the kurdish battalions are female. and they are fighting with 40-year-old weapons, all right. they are fighting isis. when you ask the question is, well, baghdad. yeah, the shiia-led government in baghdad does have a problem with us arming the kurds or the yazidis or others in the region. but that's because of the influence of iran that doesn't want to see anything except shiia militias operating across the region. why should we care about the pressure from iran on baghdad? why shouldn't we -- and i got legislation, bipartisan legislation that i passed out of committee to arm the kurdish
forces. you have 180,000 peshmerga, 180,000. you have 40,000 isis fighters. but as the -- as the kurdish soldiers tell us, we don't have artillery. we don't have long-range mortars. we don't have anti-tank weapons. that is why it is so hard for us to stop isis. another question i have. besides arming the christians and the yazidis and the kurds and the sunni tribes who want to take their towns back and live now in d.p. camps. oh, maybe seven million people now have been displaced within syria and we have no safe zone that this administration has set up to protect them. they would like to go back. they would like to have weaponry and some training from the u.s. to take their villages back.
but as long as we're going to defer to shiia militia or to baghdad and iran, how is that going to happen? and as long as we're not going to forward deploy our forward observers in order to call in those air strikes, how are we going to give close order -- you know, close air support to those kurdish units and other units fighting isis? we need a strategy not to contain isis but to destroy isis so that those young men and women, now, watching on the internet suddenly get the message that it's not their destiny to go join isis and expand the caliphate, that that's a losing cause. that takes a change of calculus on the part of the administration. danielle: now -- are you optimistic now that they've taken back ramadi? mr. royce: i'm somewhat optimistic.
the human rights abuses, to put it mildly, that they inflicted upon indigenous village populations have created a huge blowback. so some of that is moving in the right direction. but we could accelerate this if we listened to those in the field who want the authorization. i'd say 75%, 80%, from what i heard from the commanders of the flights that go out come back without getting authorization out of washington in terms of dropping their ordnance. they got to get approval out of washington and in this kind of situation with those rules of engagement, you know the challenge there. for all of those reasons, i would like to accelerate the rollback of isis because so much
depends upon us getting a handle on this enthusiasm of recruitment that right now is such a problem in europe and north africa and now it's becoming a problem here. danielle: for as long as they're perceived to be winning, they're going to be recruiting. i don't think there's any question about that. now, let's change gears a little bit. you've introduced legislation to support military assistance to ukraine. i know the administration has frankly, to me, inexplicably resisted that. this is the challenge we face in ukraine. we're not able to arm the people on the ground to support themselves. it's not -- there's an analogy to what you were just talking about in the middle east. putin is now in syria. how do we meet this challenge? mr. royce: well, if we go back, danny, one more step, why did it begin? it began with a decision to pull our interceptors out of poland and the czech republic.
our secretary of state hillary clinton and this idea of pushing the reset, the idea that the obama administration wanted to send a signal to putin and we had put in an interceptor system. we are expanding the system as a counterweight if iran ever threatened europe or the united states, the concept was to have the interceptor system and a program where we could intercept any missiles coming out of iran before they arced, you know, and fell into european or u.s. territory. but the russians were pushing back on that, and so in the face of the commitment that had been made by poland and the czech republic, our secretary of state clinton and the president pulled out this system, and i believe that as a consequence of that, putin read that as weakness, a look of resolve on the part of the united states.
and saw an opportunity when the situation presented itself in ukraine. now, myself and eliot engel and a delegation of eight, four on each side, went into ukraine and we went all the way east before you get in order to talk to the russian-speaking there. to get their feelings about what we was going on, to take their temperature. and we talked to the civil society, the lawyers groups, the women's groups, the jewish groups, different minority groups, the mayor, the council. the response we got was that, look, we get a lot of -- they said this. putin is recruiting every skinhead and malcontent he can find in the russian-speaking world and they're bringing them in here with weaponry, but we can handle that because we can tell the -- our accent from their accent.
we arrest them. that's not the problem. the problem is the russian tanks. our problem is that we do not have anti-tank weapons to stop their tanks. and our problem is that you won't sell or give us those weapons. so the reason for the legislation, danny, is to give those in ukraine a credible deterrence that says to putin, if you continue with the armor in this region, there will now be an antidote for inserting those tanks into this situation because they clearly feel they could have handled the situation, the circumstances if it weren't for russian armor and russian troops.
so our goal, obviously, we have the sanctions on russia to try to push russia out, but for me i think the problem is, if you show resolve upfront, if like reagan you announce that because the iranians have taken the hostages, when you become president you're going to do something about it, what happened the day he was being sworn in? our hostages at the time were being taken to a canadian plane and they were trying to get them off the tarmac as fast as they could before reagan took that oath of office, right? what's happening today in iran? they took an additional american hostage after the agreement was signed by our secretary of state. so i think our whole strategy has to look at what's worked in the past, including, by the way, broadcasting. i was in eastern europe, in east germany on an exchange program years ago. i saw the effects of reagan's orchestration of those
broadcasts under radio free europe, radio liberty, where we had a different plan. our plan was to reach out and actually change those governments by taking that 2/3 opposition that existed and ratcheting that up to 85%, which is exactly what happened. and in east germany, where i saw this happened, you could see exactly what was happening with the population and you could see that inevitably now because we were sharing our values, the types of values the a.e.i. speaks of, along the role that we had around the world to explain these political ideas of freedom, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, tolerance, these were the concepts that were being taught and people were listening to this. this is what should be going on now with respect to our broadcast into eastern europe and into russia and what does
even the administration says the broadcasting is practically defunct. so the legislation that myself and eliot engel are moving addresses that in two ways. you put a strong c.e.o. in charge of this instead of a seven-board, you know, nine members of the board that can't make a quorum. you let that c.e.o. run it day-to-day and you give that c.e.o. the mission that we once gave radio free europe, radio liberty and you guess us back up countering what putin is doing with his propaganda machine and r.t. television along with what isis is doing. danielle: so the radio is the surrogate radio and also our direct broadcasting back in the day really were a lifeline of hope. we heard one talk about how they were the -- hearing that was really something that gave them optimism that they had a future. in the 1990's we created radio
free asia. to do the same thing. mr. royce: i had a hand in that. danielle: i'm trying to understand what's happened. when i looked at the senate foreign relations, we created the broadcasting board in actually to double down on protecting these radios from, you know, the influence of the go along to get along in diplomacy. what happened? mr. royce: so it's morphed into national public radio for -- [laughter] mr. royce: with a bureaucracy and without the mission that we had at the time -- and let's be honest. our mission was to infuse those societies with the knowledge that would allow them to move towards greater freedom. and greater support for market economy, right? and a template in a lesson of tolerance of how democratic systems would work.
we have moved off of that mission, but there's no reason we can't move back onto it, and the legislation today is not obviously about radios. it's about the internet. it's also about television. it's about the whole pan plea of social media that we can deploy. but to do it we have to feel confident in our message about our goals. we have to be able to talk about freedom. we have to be able to talk about these issues that i'm speaking of -- freedom of religion and so forth -- and give people a vision of a different society than the one that they see clashing around them. you have to be confident to do that and you have to believe that the right thing to do is to empower the people. i believe the right thing is to be with the 2/3 of the people in iran that went to the streets.
i don't think the right thing to do is to increase the leverage of the ayatollah or the irgc in that society which will now receive $100 billion-plus in revenue because we've sort of forgotten that all of those companies were nationalized, including the oil industry, right? it's not going to the iranian people the way it's been set up. it's going through the iranian revolutionary guard corps. what will they do with that additional money? what is the ayatollah going to do? this is not going to be empowering for the people in iran. so i think this strategy has to be reversed. danielle: so we talked a lot about political freedom. we haven't talked about economic freedom. you've come out in favor of the -- of t.p.p., the trans-pacific partnership. mr. royce: yes. i'll just explain my thinking which i have sat down with the representatives of governments across -- across the pacific rim and in europe and what they share with me is, look, we're
either going to have agreements for international trade, which are low tariffs, high standards, or we're going to have agreements if beijing is leading the process of low tariffs, no standards. and we figured out that for us we're much better protected in these negotiations if we can have high standards. so we're willing to give you more -- market access. we're willing to open our markets. after all, your tariffs are pretty low to begin with. ours are pretty high. we'll bring our tariffs down, and you write agreements with high standards and we'll sign onto that because we would sooner have america driving this train than beijing. this is also what european parliamentarians of either
political stripe, you know, across the spectrum, tell us privately. now, we understand protectionist attitudes and so forth in europe, but when you're talking to those who actually understand what's at stake, they encourage us to move forward and to lead because they say, if you don't lead in the united states, then beijing is going to lead and that's not going to have a happy outcome. danielle: so critics of t.p.p. have said -- in fact, critics even among those who are nominally free traders, critics have said some of the provisions will allow the chinese and state-owned enterprises to slide into t.p.p. with no problem, that some of the intellectual property provisions aren't good. how do you take that? mr. royce: well, the intellectual property provisions are existing.
i would like to see them stronger. but on i.p. protections, i.p. protections are in there. you contrast that with what beijing is pushing which has no protections, no protections. this obviously increasing -- don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good, danny. that is what i would say here. and remember this is not a situation where if we advocate moving forward trade liberalization in a rules-based system -- i just want people to reflect on what part of the consequences have been in terms of liberalizing trade around the world. part of that consequence, if you look at economies then, world economy was about $5 trillion. today it's $70 trillion.
if you look at child mortality rates then, we cut that rate by 2/3. we have cut that rate by 2/3. i mean, around the globe, the answer is not to put up higher tariffs. we saw what that looked like during the great depression. because that great depression was a worldwide depression, and one of the things that accelerated it was this -- was governments moving forward with ever higher tariffs as we fought tariff wars, and today we're in a situation where we could be so advantaged if we can build on the momentum of higher and higher standards, because we have our allies in europe and we have our allies in the pacific rim who will agree to go along with us. but if we lose the momentum on this process and instead it's driven in asia by beijing, i
think it's going to be a much different future. danielle: i take a little bit of a glim on us and institutions like ours as well. i don't think we talk enough -- we talk a lot about political freedom. we talk about human freedom and religious freedom. we don't talk enough about the transformative role of economic freedom. even in the middle east where we don't see that, it makes such a huge difference in people's lives. i have completely monopolized the microphone and i'd like to open things up for questions. everybody knows our procedures. i'll call on you. someone will come over to you with a microphone. identify yourself and your affiliation, please, and put your brilliant, brilliant statement in the short of a very short question or i'll cut you off. this gentleman had his hand up first. >> chairman royce, jake from the american hindu foundation.
thank you. president obama has invited prime minister for talks leer in the spring. and these talks now are overshadowed with yet another terrorist attack. as chairman of the foreign affairs committee, what would you advise the administration should be the trajectory of these talks to kush religious -- curb religious extremism in the area? mr. royce: i talked to the prime minister of india. this issue of better cooperation, anti-terrorist cooperation between the united states and india, and the attack on mumbai, for example, is an example of where we picked up certain intelligence but -- and we shared it with the indian government, but collectively we weren't able, even though we knew an attack was coming, we knew the city that was going to be attacked, we weren't able to discern enough information to prevent that loss of life.
the secondary problem, of course, is many of the schools, in this case, the campus, that exists to recruit those jihadists have not been closed down. there are 600 schools as well as this l.e.t. campus that exist in pakistan that i have been trying to get closed down in three trips over the years to pakistan. i have pushed, pushed, pushed on this. part of the problem is these are not funded actually inside pakistan. there's gulf state funding that continues to play this role in pushing an ever more confrontational interpretation of this jihadist ideology. so we need to work worldwide to shut down the funding of that kind of mechanism. third, we need to work on the internet with respect to, you know, we got to work with palo
alto as well as in india and in tel aviv with respect to those that are involved in that i.t. community in terms of how you take this down on the internet. so there's a number of different solutions here. we need to do all of this in tandem, and we must understand, you know, as we dismiss isis and these other organizations as the j.v. team, this is not the case. they are growing with their momentum. this is accelerating, and instead this must be along with containing or stopping iran from developing the capabilities eventually of getting a nuclear weapons program. and i would argue that the way this agreement was handled was just a temporary 10-year, 15 at the most, hiatus on this. i don't think we -- until we have a strategy to empower the
people in iran, i think we got a problem if the ayatollah is making all of these decisions and until we close down those deobandi schools and the l.e.t. campuses where the terrorists are recruited, i think we'll have the same problem in terms of the attacks in india. danielle: it's interesting you bring this up. we've taken our eye off the ball in pakistan. we are not talking about al qaeda as well and what they're doing in afghanistan. i didn't touch on that with you so i encourage you all to ask. this lady has a question. >> hi. penny starr with c.n.s. news. so if you could advise the new president in 2016, what would be the first priority in restoring u.s. leadership around the world? mr. royce: well, i think the first priority is to lay out a strategy in which we're going to lead. and i think reaching out, first, to our democratic allies and then to our other friends around the world in order to lay out
what that strategy is going to look like. i think, also, in terms of explaining the rules of the road internationally, ok. the international treaties and agreements, for example, that mean and are interpreted by all of the countries except one means you can't claim a reef at your sovereign territory. you cannot take a marking pen and draw a nine-dash line around the south china sea up against the borders of nine countries and say all of this is our territory. so i think it's important we work with the international community and with our democratic allies and others to say these are the rules and we're not going to violate the rules. and with respect to terrorism, there's a new strategy, and our strategy is not to contain it,
it's to defeat it. and you take it from there. danielle: can i follow-up on your south china sea statement? what more should we be doing? we're doing some freedom of navigation, very limited freedom of navigation operations in the south china sea to push back on the chinese. what more should we be doing? mr. royce: the whole question here is freedom of navigation. so, dani, what we need to do is do that on a routine basis and do that with a pacific fleet. i don't think you necessarily just want to send one frigate out there. you just want to keep those sea lanes open and make it clear, by the way, working internationally, since everyone else happens to per receive this exactly the same -- perceive this exactly the same way, you make this a worldwide issue that these are the rules of the road.
danielle: gentleman back here. >> thank you, chairman royce, and a.e.i. i'm the communications director. this week you had a closed door briefing with ambassador james warlick on a conflict. particularly steps you and other congressional leaders would like to see this administration take to bring peace to the region. could you elaborate on that as much as you can as well as other steps you and other leaders would like to see this administration or future administrations take in regards to protecting and helping our allies in armenia, georgia, who are in constant threat of other forces, such as turkey?
mr. royce: i sent a letter to the president along with my ranking member, eliot engel, and others on the committee that lay out a strategy of, first, putting these range finding -- special equipment that can tell where a gun a fired from. if you have an incoming shell, it can tell which side of the line the shell is coming from. as a direction finding equipment. second, to put observers there and, third, to require all sides to pull up snipers off of the front lines. if these three things are done, the n.g.o. community and those in the pentagon tell us it will lead to a much safer situation because you'll no longer have the trip wires. so we're pushing for all three of those actions. now while at the same time we're talking to both governments, i've been in baku with a bipartisan delegation. eliot engel and i trying to lower those temperatures.
>> thank you for your time. kurdistan tv. in your opinion, how important is it how that the u.s.a. separate the kurds, make logistic -- military capability? thank you. mr. royce: i think it's very important. because first of all, the kurdish forces are doing most of the fighting on the ground. second, the kurdish forces are the best fighters. third, as i said, 30% of the kurdish battalion are female and those women are fighting up against isis. and you and i both read accounts in the american press about their bravery and action. i think it's morally -- it's not morally responsible for us to allow those women on the front to fight isis with 40-year-old equipment.
they need to be given the anti-tank guns, the artillery, the long-range mortars that they have requested in order to match isis. and if they can fight with the same equipment, i have no doubt that they will be victorious, and i think it is a very important point. danielle: do you ever worry that supporting some of these -- this -- these groups on the basis of tribes or sect or ethnicity will push the middle east? mr. royce: we should be focusing on giving them the equipment that will allow these fighters to take their villages back. that should be the focus. and the munitions, necessary, to take their villages back because if we do not, if we -- as i
mentioned the word paralysis, if the administration were in a state of paralysis, think for a minute, dani, we have seven million people displaced in camps that want to go back to their villages. what are the consequences of that? and that is inside syria and iraq. imagine the million and a half in turkey. the three quarters of a million in lebanon or a million now in lebanon. the three quarters of a million in jordan. the million in europe. i mean, we have a humanitarian nightmare, and we dither because, yes, we're pressured by the baghdad government. yes, they constantly tell us, no, no, if you're going to arm anybody, come through us. but the problem is that until they show a capability of standing up to tehran, to standing up to the iranian regime and actually engaging the sunni tribes and the kurds and everyone in the same way, until we see that action, and i don't
dispute that current government is certainly much better than maliki's government, but there is a habit that has -- has been put into place. we have to break that habit, and i would say the way we begin is arming the yazidis and the kurds and the sunni tribes that want to take their villages back. danielle: young man in the back there. >> good morning, mr. chairman. from the wilson center. you began talking about the administration befriending our enemies. my question is about the administration's attempt to actually support our friends, specifically with the asian rebalance. how would you characterize the progress so far? what more should we be doing with the pacific? and how would you respond to china's critique
that this is just a containment strategy? mr. royce: a containment strategy, well, it's not a containment strategy. what it is is an effort to move forward with the rule of law. and i support very much the administration's support for the trans-pacific partnership as well as the atlantic agreement. those are steps in the right direction in terms of enforcing the rule of law, the rules of the road. it will better protect our i.p. property but it will lead to a cinergy of more economic growth. i think all of that is the step in the direction. danielle: there are two ladies. >> thank you. reporter from voice america. i have a question. we talk about iran and north
korea, russia, china. chairman royce, in your view, which country poses a bigger threat to the united states in the coming year? thank you. mr. royce: i think the greatest long-term threat is still iran. it is a threat to the region and 15 years out it's a threat potentially to the united states. and that is why i am -- i am concerned that the perception of our tilt to iran in the region will complicate our efforts to try to constrain iranian behavior. the secondary problem i think we face long term -- by the way, i think the ayatollah basically has his own caliphate. when he is talking about overturning governments in yemen, in bahrain, in saudi arabia, i think this idea of the
shiia crescent stretching to lebanon is a very, very destabilizing reality that we're dealing with and then at the same time we have this jihadist concept of the isis caliphate. so you have two competing ideologically driven interpretations, but both are moving away from any acceptance ideao -- of political pluralisg logically-driven interpretations, but both are acceptance from any f political mroupleuralism or e idea of freedom of religion for people to practice their own religions. that's not tolerated in any of these quarters. so with that intolerance and comes ed radicalization the danger that either one of
hose groups get ever deadlier weapons into their possession. hat's why i would like to see isis decisively destroyed. daniel danielle: go back over that direction, this gentleman audience: thank you. it seems that sanctions elief on iran is day-to-day according to secretary kerry esterday, and once i.e.a. verifies that iran, in fact, met ts commitments, the nuclear deal relieves those sanctions automatically without input from congress. given your view of your pretty substantial threat, what can congress do in the long term in new era of u.s. sanctions sector? iran's oil
mr. royce: well, of course, i don't think it's just my view. initiative the president only got the president of 42 members in the senate, all right, and certainly, a minority of the members of the house of many entatives, including defections from his own party in the house. so i think the question of what we can do depends upon our resolve to first try to enforce the agreement, and i haven't seen any real resolve on the terms of tion in enforcing it. whether or not we intend to keep the commitment both those who voted for it and those who opposed it, which was regardless of what that s next, we all agree that are inolutions place will prevent iran from testings on rther
icbns and further support for terror. now that they're in violation of that, i would say this is the intentions.f their i would put one other thing on he table, the reports that surfaced in the "wall street journal" that iran had agreed to the fer the capablity into hands of hezbollah for targeting of their missiles. do you know there's 100,000 missiles now in the hands of hezbollah? but they're dumb rockets. i watch those things crash into the city every day. i was in the trauma hospital. down were 600 victims there but those were dumb rockets. they couldn't target the tallest uilding or the airport what iran has said is we will capability to
hezbollah, to hamas in gaza, and we will rebuild the tunnels. now, ladies and gentlemen, those re direct violations of the international resolutions and against for sanctions that kind of activity. is the administration going to ayatollah that we are not going to transfer that the hands of hezbollah. and all of this, we intend to use our committee as we've done in the past to, put legislation floor of the house of representatives, but also to encourage the administration to take action. the administration we would like to have as a partner in halting
iran in this kind of conduct. they agree, r not we will go forward with legislation to try to force this issue. danielle: we have a lot of people still waiting. i know you have a hard stop. o we have time for one more question? mr. royce: sure. anielle: this young lady waving her arm. and this is going to be our last bit of everybody. audience: a handful of pentagon officials have been calling for of the f.m.s. recently. they have been saying that partners have been having to buy russia and places like that because the u.s. process is too slow. do you plan to introduce any anguage that would help speed up the process or would you have any concerns about doing so? mr. royce: no, i don't have any concerns about doing that, because we have been pushing the administration on this. with our do also industrial base, the defense of our industrial base. when our allies need this equipment, it makes very little instead, have them go,
to other countries because, frankly, part of keeping our production lines open and part deterrence is having allies and friends able to count upon the united states for weapons of deterrence, and discussions ongoing with the administration on this in order to try to expedite and reverse some of these policies that have gone on, where things have been held year after year. i used to say month after month, so it's now year after year we're pushing hard on that. danielle: i'll ask everybody to remain seated as the congressman has to head back to his vault on capitol hill. but i know you'll all join me in thanking him for his leadership. applause]
indistinct conversations] briefing pentagon with general john kelly, marine corps commander of the u.s. southern command. after that, republican presidential candidate john kasich, holding a town hall meeting in exeter, new hampshire. and house homeland security michael mccaulan f texas, on the arrest of two refugees on terror-related charges. national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> on newsmakers, texas congressman max thornberry, services he armed committee. he talks about what he hopes to hear from president obama's state of the union address, north korea's reported nuclear policy iran, and other
issues. ers", sunday at 10:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. >> we need to know how many people are reading us, we need coming to they're us. for example fthey're not coming directly to our web site and coming to us through facebook or through google or through twitter or snapchat or reddit, or any of these other venues, we should know that. "q&a", ay night on talks ton post editor about the changes at the post since he took over in 2015. and the role in boston globe. outline k it's a great as to how the investigation unfolded. t's important to keep in mind that it's a movie and not a documentary. so you had to compress within seven-month-plus investigation, including things that happened afterwards, and you had to introduce a lot of characters and you had to
introduce the important themes that emerged over the course of that investigation. >> sunday night at 8:00 eastern "q&a." as president obama prepares for his state of the union address released this video on twitter. president obama: i'm working on my state of the union address. it's my last one, and as i'm writing, i keep thinking about togetherwe've traveled these past seven years. that's what makes america great, for the ity to change better, our ability to come together as one american family and pull us all closer to the america we believe in. it's tough to see sometimes in the day-to-day polls of washington but it is who we are i want to focus on in this state of the union address. >> and c-span's coverage starts p.m. eastern with senate historian betty cohen and real congressional reporter james arkin, looking ack at the history and tradition of the president's
annual message and what to expect in this year's address. and at 9:00, a live coverage of the president's speech followed y the republican respondent by south carolina governor nikki hailey, plus your reaction by hone, facebook, tweets and e-mail as well as those of members of congress, on c-span, c-span radio, and c-span.org, and we'll re-air our state of the union coverage and the republican response starting at p.m. eastern, 8:00 p.m. pacific. also, live on c-span 2 after the speech, we'll hear from members of congress in statuary hall with their reaction to the president's address. >> next, u.s. marine corps eneral john kelly, a matter of u.s. southern command, speaking with reporters at the pentagon. e talked about islamic extremism and the transfer of gua guantanamo prisoner detainees. since november of
2012. this is 45 minutes. to kelly: very, very happy be here, made friends over the years, and as you probably know, know, you know everything, i retire at the end of this month. command in south com is next thursday. i would tell you that south comm is a very, very unique organization, a remarkable organization, very different than the other co-comms, a very different mission. t's all about broadening and deepening partnerships down there to say the least. and i will tell you the partners we have in latin america, the caribbean, like the united states, want to be associated the united states. democracy emo about and human rights and that kind of thing and some of that is but that d around really like us and associate with us. they very much like and are of the fact that southern
command, that they don't preach to them and point the finger at them, but offer a lot of good good , good education, assistance. the other thing we do a lot of partner, we gency way.a dict drugs in a big we had a tremendous year of cocaine.tion of there is no u.s. military assets to speak of. we've partnered with various organizations has interdict 291 cocaine.ons of that's after we left latin america. ur partner in this, we have a very special relationship with, remarkable people and military, is columbia. they themselves interdicted a couple hundred metric tons of heading to the united states before it ever left their country. they eradicated tens of thousands of cocoa plantation
bushes and certainly hundreds nd hundreds of cocoa labs, cocaine labs that are destroyed every year. ther great partners, of course interdicting y of drugs once it's ashore, and the iolence it brings, has really devastated some of our really good partners, honduras, salvador, guatemala. problems are associated directly with our drug problems in the united states and you all know what it does in mexico. but there's good news throughout much of the region. hang it up dy to here, and as i left here at the getting options and i was tired of my wall. early some time in the 2000s. i thought southern command would allow me that would
energies and talent and it has allowed me to do this. you may or may not know this, and may or may not be an issue, ut i ran guantanamo bay, directly through the president of the united states and secretary of defense. do not do policy, whether it opens or closes, whether it should be opened. mandate ion ops, my from the president through the secretary of defense, is to make sure we're in accordance with and regulations of the detainees, as long as they're and there, are treated well humanely, are taken well of otherwise, and we do that superbly, and i'm very proud of my marines in guantanamo that execute this mission as well as they do. open it nd there and up. rita. audience: thanks.
two questions. gitmo. later this month, we're told we can expect a large number of detainees will likely be , more than a t dozen. wondering if the recent releases have been in chunks lately, give credence to the argument that the military has g its feet over thisous years, and whether amounts to a new effort that ould have actually happened earlier, and just a second question, you mentioned some of he interdiction that you've been doing, what little u.s. military assets. here was a lot of discussion about additional drones, army drones and other drones that used.be has have they seen any increase at all in the amount of u.a.b.
assets and other help for the war, and is that still an unmet need? off kelly: let me start with the drug question. again, the partnership issue can't be overstated down there, particularly when we don't have u.s. military assets -- sufficient u.s. military assets. in that, i count the united states coast guard. we have some cutters. we have partners like canada that frequently provide a ship. the dutch will frequently -- and ships.re not war these tend to be coast guard type ships, tenders. the french occasionally and u.k. in fact, 70% of our take last year, the 191 metric tons, would not have happened had it not partners.ur and i don't count columbia in this, because they do so much before the product ever leaves their country. -- the e -- we can see joint interagency task force in if you have not been down there, you need to get
down there, is probably the best center in the world and i think south comm and the c.i.a. would say the same thing. it brings the entire government into the same place to get drugs throughout latin america and the caribbean. the beauty is it's a long way from washington and i think you'd all agree at least it's been marginal. the further you get away from washington, the better things work. people actually talk to each other. people actually socialize with each other. there's no gether, race holes. when i say e -- and c.i.a., f.b.i., security, it's d a great organization. so we can see the drugs. the d.e.a. agents, f.b.i., partnering countries, the honduras, and to shoulder der
with men and women of their country's equivalents, if you will. lawe's no equivalent to our enforcement people in the world, but the rough equivalent, and that's where much of our human intelligence comes from. sometimes, not unusually, you know, plus or minus an hour or two, a ton of cocaine is going to leave a given port and head north. i might know the guy's first name. i might have his phone number. that's the human intelligence. up, then when we pick them most of the i.s.o., we pick them p3 aircraft flying out of various locations down there. oftentimes, homeland security, and i cannot say enough good things about really my number 1 partner, and that is homeland security and j.johnson. so we can see it move. and i can't do is interdict because we don't have -- and it's very simple. all i need is a helicopter. movement of e the the ton, two tons, five tons, the helicopter shows up, they coming.at's they throw their electronics over the side and wait to be picked up. it's a law enforcement effort, remember, and we take the driver
of the boat, and then he goes typically the federal legal that e system and completes the cycle of human intelligence. so i actually don't get much i.s.r. but i don't need an awful lot more. drones are nice because they can don't get ever and tired and are less expensive to operate. any would not see increases, certainly no drones. a lot of the countries down there there, wanted drones, and we encourage them to do so, but the right kind of drones. they don't need high-end drones. issance t need reconna drones, so we encourage them to of hat, but again, get most that equipment from somewhere other than the united states because it is very hard to deal with the united states in terms of purchasing things for a lot of different reasons so they tend to try to default to israel or russia, maybe china. i don't know if that answers
side.uestion on the drug on the gitmo, you know, i can last personally for the three years, because that's how long i've been there, 38 months, of gitmo is memory of guantanamo bay, my staff and there, have ff down been caught with a lot of authority, historical authority 2006, and then less so before that just because of turnover. to my time, the fact there was reporting about this building, secretaries of defense, people in uniform, on ops, in any ti downshape or form, slowing detainees, pede the from my perspective, complete nonsense. it's an insult, frankly, to military officers, to be accused
of whether we agree or disagree with any of the policies that we the in any way impede progress. the president wants to close it, it.ave a role, not enclosing i have a role in detention ops. my only role in transfers is give me a name, give me a country, give me a time frame and i will get that person to country. that's my role in detention ops. the movement of foreign delegations if they want to come down. ever ever ever do facilitate the immediate movement when they want to come to guantanamo bay. we -- typically, the process wants to delegation come, or even if they don't want to come, when there's a transfer, a country transfer, they are provided a pretty detailed summary of the medical condition of the individual, and guantanamo, ome to
sometimes they will come with questions because they've been copy of that ced medical thing, and not all transiffers associated with foreign delegations travel down. and always when they come down, detainee talk to the for any length of time they time they ength of want. typically, the conversation goes about 30 minutes, and it goes something like, you want to come -- do you want to leave guantanamo? the answer is, yes, and that's about the extent of it. then foreign delegation will doctors.y talk to my they will talk sometimes to the guard personnel and just ask, behave? s guy what's his life -- you know, whatever. lly then they will eventua typically get word that the country will take them, and then we work that. over and re i take execute the transfer. there was some reporting about medical records.
foreign er had a delegation, never had a foreign for the full medical record. they're always, always, always satisfied with the summary we give them. in one case where i recently reported -- not the reporter's the , by the way, individual in question, his edical record is at least 15,000 pages, all of which would have to be redacted by every government agency and intelligence agency in the united states. that would take two years. better hought it was a idea to transfer the guy than to hold him there for two years unnecessarily. we've never been asked and never complained about the foreign delegation access. and, of course, i welcome the press and i welcome the ongressional delegations and they come down frequently. jennifer. jennifer: there was a report in the "wall street journal" about hell-fire missile that was
delivered to cuba. and it's been considered -- gen. kelly: is there a post office for that? jennifer: it was mislabeled. it was sent to a nato exerciser, and somehow it wound its way through europe and made it to cube a obviously from your spot, you're not familiar with it. i was going to ask you do you righthere that missile is now? gen. kelly: no idea. and since you bring up cuba, you forward to, you know, increasing our relationship with cuba. but right now and certainly for the last 50 years, we've had zero relationship with cuba with the exception of guantanamo bay. but i do look forward to -- it time,e certainly after my but one of the things i provided to the state department and by weension to the white house, do a lot of conferences in south comm, that's how we do a lot of our engagements and some of it -- i think the kind of thing,
very seldom is it like in connecticut, drug addiction, which is typically not, when seas, typicallyh not connecticut, but other relief ike humanitarian and disaster relief, that kind of thing. invited members of the cuban military to come to the baby steps, ent, the big and u.s. sent hospital ship. and when it was in haiti, i ffered to have -- there's a fair number of cuban doctors sprinkled around, to say the doctors lot of cuban that do this engagement. some of them we offered the cuban government, they're not military but offered them the opportunity to come aboard do, rt and see what they and they took us up on it. doctorsome of the cuban in port-au-prince to come aboard do, and our they military to see what they do ashore. baby steps like that.
but i have almost zero involvement with the cuban now.tary right jennifer: and a follow-up. your son robert was killed in 2010.istan in you served time in iraq. an we get your assessment of how the wars in afghanistan and iraq have been prosecuted in think years, and what you could have been done differently o maybe isis and the taliban wouldn't be as resurgent as they right now. iraq.kelly: i can talk i've got three tours there. but i'm a military man, a professional and understand how these things can be done. i think the ground commanders there, you know, as we listen to him, he talks about keeping his troops there for as long as he can. when i was in iraq, on the province, there was remarkable improvement in the security
forces. it started there first and kind of metafticized around the country. we are very proud that the two provincevisions in our were trained and ended up being the best acquisitions and are on we always had advisors with them. this war stuff is hard, and it's not for the untrained and the unadvised, and keep d say that to sufficient numbers intel people intel, ide all of this advisors to critique the ncos after and the they're out in operations, not but to critique, to suggest and whisper in the ear, this, and how to do we were doing that in the province. provisions ved the down to basra when the 14th
provision collapsed, had advisors with them. it was the eighth division. a superb job and went to other parts. advising is ship equipment is the important but it's not people ent, ime, less involvem unless you come to a steady state number of people. jennifer: are you saying it was mistake to pull out of iraq? gen. kelly: i'm saying there's other ways to have done it in much smaller numbers than we had done it, certainly at the height of the war. tom. tom: along those lines, there apache about having type helicopters in iraq with iraqi forces and having u.s. advisors accompanying iraqi forces. would it make sense to have
going forward? gen. kelly: tom, we obviously have a whole new war over there. should by the way, i add, when we were there towards the end, there was another man there fromle america. his name was jim jeffreys. he was our ambassador and a former vietnam, army-navy, airborn. they all had unbelievable influence on his team there at obviously the military people. and it was a lot of learning to be done, a lot of advising to be those two gentlemen and their team, to the iraqi as well as dership, to -- and it's kind of like, you know, if you've ever tried to youngster how to drive a bike, you know, once you take those training wheels off. iraq, the training wheels were coming off. but if you're a parent teaching a kid how to ride a two-wheel bike, you're running behind them grab the time ready to seat if they start to go over, and over time, they learn how to
and i think e that's one way to look at what we could have done. tom: what about today? would it have been wise? gen. kelly: we have a war on our hand. if we want the iraqis to get good at this fight, i believe we in terms inforce them of not only the equipment, but capability, dvisory that kind of thing, tom. yes. there's only one way for an advise. o >> i have a question. of course, the marines were ground opening all combat trucks to women. the report found that mixed lethal, its were less slower, more prone to injuries than the all male units. talk about the way ahead on this. how can they put this into effect? hat concerns you in the way ahead with this?
en. kelly: i would just offer given the mission of the united states armed forces to fight the nation's wars, i believe that every decision we make, whether it's a ersonnel decision, tom, or an acquisition, or a new whatever widget. decision has to go through only one filter, and that is decision, and that is does it make us more lethal on battlefield. it will end up with less on alties on our side and the other side, because they're human beings too. some of them very much deserve don't.killed, but others so that's the filter. so if you look at anything we're ontemplating doing, does it make us more lethal? if the answer to that is yes, then do it. if the answer to that is no, clearly, don't do it. if the answer to that is, mm, it shouldn't hurt, i would suggest that we shouldn't do it, because
it might hurt. in my opinion. the way i think you do this is since we're ordered to do it is you simply do it. -- and we see r this happen a lot over the 45 armed 've been in the forces -- is right now, they say we're not going to change any standards. there will be great pressure, whether it's 12 months from now, because therom now, question will be asked whether we've let women into these other roles, why aren't they staying in those other roles? as aren't they advicing infantry people? persons, i guess. why aren't they becomingancing infantry people? persons, i guess. more en't they becoming senior. and the answer, i think will be, if we don't change standards, i think it will be very difficult to have any numbers, any real infantry,come into the or the rangers, or the seals, but that's their business.
so we'll have very small numbers anyways, and then the only sign -- this is not the marine's study. this was a study that the marine corps contracted at the university of pittsburgh, i think. the other aspect is because of the nature of infantry combat and infantry training and all of this is a higher percentage of young women in the scientific study that got hurt, and some of them hurt forever. so i think the -- it would be the pressure to not probably the enerals that are here now, but for the generals to come and admirals, to lower standards, the only way t'll work and the way i hear some people, particularly gender-driven people in washington in the land and the to work.want it >> general kelly, voice of america, the last time you were here, you had talked about the state, how there are about 100 fighters going from
caribbean from venezuela. could you give us an update on the status now of those fighters overow many more have gone and then on guantanamo, one of the criticisms has been how is, and i'd e base like to get your opinion. do you feel that the base is cost-effective, is it too expensive to continue running? gen. kelly: on the islamic extremism, again, it goes without saying, the vast majority of the people that the islam ic faith are folks.aw-abiding there are a fair amount colonies old english down in jamaica and places like that. overwhelming -- not huge percentages of the population radical 's a few very mosques. one, in particular, has associated itself, himself, the imam, with isis. .e're not seeing his numbers i said 100 last year.
150 this year. we know a few have been killed. we worked very close again. americans hat we as take for granted is not only the superb military that you report the fbi and the c.i. a. and the .s.a., tremendous law enforcement people we have inside our country. we take that for granted. many of the countries, most countries in the world don't have anything approaching, and certainly none better. the countries we work with, and that partnership issue, we work with them and give them as much information as we can. t.s.a.on't have they don't have things at the airports in terms of checking peopleings and goings of so we do the best we can to help them. i would be more concerned, particularly now that the islamic extremists and terrorist vs shifted their message, and hat is, rather than come to syria, why don't you stay at bernardino, or do boston, or do fort hood.
and my concern as the south comm commander, is they can -- even of these, you know, can cause a lot of trouble, often down in the caribbean, because they don't have the f.b. we nd law enforcement like do. and many of those countries have very, very small militaries if all, ande militaries at they welcome the help from the united states, but -- did i get that? okay. >> in guantanamo? gen. kelly: expense of guantanamo. it depends. functioning base and has been for 100 years. frankly, when we come up with estimates, the cost per detainee and all of that, we were never asked at south comm. someone else came up with the number. ut i know that if you look at my gitmo budget, it's something of 100-plus million
-- that is that is an approximate. the facility in place, up and cost g, if you count the of the facility, for sure it's an expensive plus, but that sum get the we don't commissions -- i don't support the commissions, they get a budget too. but as a nation, you make a decision what you're going to pend your money on and if guantanamo -- if the detained -- a detainee at more money than it would be than if you, say, took that person to the united a policy that's decision, then so be it. opinion eally have an on whether it's too expensive or not. just know that, you know, the spend very ven, i prudently, and as i say, they're very, very well taken care of. yes? >> thank you, general. i wanted to get your opinion on
something guantanamo-related and also something that's been in the news. what did you think of the swap bergdohl and five senior talib taliban? gen. kelly: policy decision. decision.unusual when i got the call -- these are all very administrative things. my staff gets an order from ultimately, we get this paper from the joint staff c-17 y, you know, acquire and move two or three or one guy or whatever to a certain country. i got a call directly from a senior official it was get ing, and these guys ready to go, and having worked up here before, was brought issue up initially and my involvement sma for secretary paneta. so this was a couple of
years -- got to be four or five years, got to be at least four years ago, and the transfer obviously at that point. i do know when they gave me the i said is this the bergdahl crowd. the same ah, it's guys, and i said, okay, and i follow orders. my question was, am i going to get the paperwork on this? he said paperwork will be coming but it's going to come quick. the ng as they get paperwork afterwards. it was a dicey transfer because e had an awful lot of press down here because it was a commissions period, so a lot of press down there. in fact, when the press were aiting for the plane and the families of the 9/11 crowd and all of those were down there, we we doing the transfer, and never got caught. so i'm sure anyone that was down at the time was probably, you know, should have been paying a little bit more attention. decision to cy transfer them. know it caused a lot of angst
in a lot of areas but here gain, i don't try to slow down transfers. i facilitate transfers, and i, follow-up get the e airplane nd when th took off, we deposited them, and monitored y will be in some way. >> to follow up on the same question, were you concerned it had llegal since congress not been notified? gen. kelly: no, i didn't know if they were notified. in that m not involved process. i would never assume that anyone in this building, for sure, would break the law. the up and up was more in terms of is the paperwork ready? -- because as ee you know, jennifer, when you sops and rocedures and all that kind of thing. but no, i didn't assume that anyone was kind of doing something illegal. yes, ma'am. >> thank you. regarding clump yashgs the
15sident will be celebrating years. i would like to know your future,on columbia, the and the president from venezuela planning an international intervention and that the united states is mentioned and that he y you. columbia, : on remarkable story in the last 15 r 18 years, columbia, a remarkable story. a lot of people in washington and other places if they know about it at all think that the nited states gave massive amounts of assistance and money and all of that. the columbians really did it all themselves. we did provide intelligence and advice. back to the questions of advising and how long to do that for, it takes a long time. there.still there were never boots on the ground in the sense we didn't go to the field with them. just human rights training was huge. how do we change our warfare to
be better than it is, and it was at the time.od they raised money through a war tax. elite of that e country had to -- are you columbian? >> yes. gen. kelly: your country at the time was standing on the edge of into hell.king down and your people decided to that. and not perfect, just like we're ot perfect, but decided to change that and congress and other people in washington worked with columbia. and i think four or five cents on the dollar came from the united states. all of the effort came from the olumbian columbians. nothing's perfect but you're that close to entering this war. my feeling is the process of ending this war, and i remember we talked to resident santos and the administration defense and the military down there, my first trip, my recollection to columbia, i said, look, if you
of thise first 50 years war was hard, the next 15 years will be more complicated, ecause you're trying to do something that isn't done very often. you're ending an internal conflict. once you get the piece of paper, you've got to figure out the treaty. you've got to figure out what do you do with all those young people, the young firefighters that have been kidnapped, not recruited, from their villages. young kids at 12 and 13 years old. what do you do with them after that's been fighters and all they've known and many of them don't know what village they came from? them.ed to train as you down size your military, thing, you kind of need to train them. i used the term, a g.i. bill for the fark. because if you don't, all they'll do is stay in the drug business because the fark is up to here in drugs and they'll turn into another one. so it's going to hard, and i hope my country -- and i've been
vocal about this, maybe too vocal, but i think people understand on the hill, that's where i've pitched this more than anywhere else, that let's -- we have to stand and plant columbia for another 10 years. and ts smaller and smaller smaller, but we still have -- and again, it's not a money thing. it's more involvement in the process and i think with all hope i'm not out of line to suggest something to the columbian people, and that is d is not going en to be immediate. it will be there, but it's not immediate, and the idea that once the peace treaty over, that the lambs will lie down with the lions, it's not happen.o as i've oftentimes said, i spend bout 40 seconds a day contemplating the situation in venezuela, and that's in prayer venezuelan people.
any people at this time deserve better than what many people in venezuela have. it's a democracy. we just saw a great election. that democracy is getting tronger, but i can tell you there is no plan of any kind anything w of to do but leave the venezuelan problem venezuelan people. >> thank you, general kelly. happy new year. my first question, goes back to gitmo. do you believe that some of the detainees were released in the ast and they had joined the street, and right now we have isil.and do you think they may have aspired or aspiring isis in because of people -- they're freely running in those countries where they have been released? en. kelly: i can only use the same numbers i hear you all
report. i don't think there's any definitive number. hear is 30%.ge you sometimes you hear less, i suppose, depending on what your agenda is. a certain percentage of them have returned to the fight. be it. i don't know, just -- i don't have any specific knowledge of you , other than what -- -- we all kneweed som some number would return to the fight. did you ask is somehow gitmo instigating isis? and again, honest men can disagree on anything. gitmo is gitmo. the one thing i do feel a little disappointed about is the fact that there's a lot of things that have happened in the terror or whatever we're calling it today, but i'm a little bit disappointed sometimes that the role of my
oftentimes tmo is maybe things that happened in other places. happened things that in other places. i'm just very proud of what they do down there, and i i'm the only mes person making that point and sometimes i wish other people would make that point. >> and general kelly, in terms afghanistan, where does it stand mou and in the future? gence concerns li the isil or isis and also outside? gen. kelly: i don't believe that we can allow islamic extremists to have, which is, i believe, a small percentage of people who follow that great religion, i don't believe we can afford to let them have a safe haven. and so i believe --i mean, we some of these things. some of the recommendations
might be distasteful or out of of some of the policymakers' thinking, but if you take point that we can't let them have safe haven, then you have to do social, economic, military action, political action, to prevent that. this is hard. this is really hard, and we know it, but we generally translate to more expensive and term than what maybe the for.on hopes yes, ma'am? kelly, i believe the saw this in uniform. and i wanted to ask do you believe u.s. gold families are currently supported. is there anything you would like nation continue and following your retirement, what s your planned involvement in that community?
i think that ell, one of the things about losing child, and you can't imagine until it happens, and i hope to you or ever does for anyone. and it doesn't matter how they die. -- i can't ild is imagine anything worse than that. i used to think when i go to all of my trips up to bethesda, walter reed, i go to the secretaries of defense, that i could somehow imagine what it would be like, r when i would send young people back from iraq that died under my command. i would write letters to somehow sympathize -- i lost a mother and a father, and you kind of think it's something like that, but it's not. it's nothing like that. so as a person that's lost a
child in combat, and the strong one in all of this is my wife, karen, and my two kids. but when you lose one in combat, opinion, there's a pride that goes with it, that he didn't have to be there doing what he was doing. he wanted to be there. he volunteered. generally speaking, there's no encouragement in our society the nation, but many, many people do, in uniform, in the military as well as police officers and c.i.a. and f.b.i., so i think they're special people but they were doing what they wanted to do. they ey were with who wanted to be with when they lost their lives. it is the ell you, most -- it caught me by emotionalthe level of impact, and every single day, i continue that. families are special, to say the least. i'm not.
they are. they don't ask for much. letters from al goldstar families who are it, and i s it worth always go back with this, it doesn't matter. that's not our question to ask as parents. that person thought -- that young person thought it was worth it, and that's the only that counts. they don't ask for anything. as i say, i think the one thing they would ask is that the cause for which their son or daughter fell, be tied to a successful end, whatever that means, as opposed to, this is getting too pain in the ass, and let's walk away from it. because that's when they start thinking it might have been not worth it. one more question maybe? >> just following on that seeing what's going on in sangham right now, pangs
your stration or anger, kids. d your family and to kelly: not my question answer. >> going back to guantanamo. transfer mind every will be different. is there an amount of time before a government acknowledges the transfer? what is the general time frame for that? quick.elly: it's pretty i couldn't put a number on it. when i first got on the job, there weren't as many foreign delegations. they seem to be more common now. and i have no idea what these countries offered to take these guys. zero idea. never asked. i think they're just going through the motions. i think they already decided whatever the deal, if this is a deal, and they come -- i think it might be particularly the countries. it might be that they can then
sell it to their own population. we went to gitmo, met with a guy, he seemed honest and that to be a good boy. but it's pretty quick. don't think they come there and make up their mind. i think they come there to get as i say, they always talk to at least the docs to my senior will, thet guy, if you about , to find out behavior. in general, it's pretty quick. couple of more a transfers before you change command. looking back, were there any on a plane, them were there any you looked at and going went, this isn't to end well or that you had heartburn when you put them on transfer? r the gen. kelly: well, they're all
bad boys. some of them were more effective in being bad boys than others. don't think we all quibble on whether 13 or 12 or eight years in detention is enough to have them having paid for whatever they did. they're bad guys. and when asked the question about the taliban five fab five, i was happy to ee that their year of restriction was extended and obviously the administration fought hard for that and the receiving country would allow that to happen. i read the same stories that, frankly, you guys write, about when they're on the phone and doing their thing. i don't know anything about that. but these are pretty senior guys. but at gitmo, they were just, guys, they s senior were kind of not very difficult with.l so there's a few down there i'd
like to punt because they are pains in the neck. but the vast majority of them are right now pretty easy to work with. i took the job with 166, i think reported. if you get the scoop right now, one in kuwait yesterday, two yesterday to gana. more coming there's this month. back toknow, if they go the fight, we'll probably kill them. good thing. so i want to end with that, i that. i should end with [laughter] and just say really and truly, i well.some of you fairly some of you i don't know at all, but it has been a pleasure pentagon know the press corps. to hear this from me but you're a very responsible group of men and women. write the ays try to most accurate story you can and
i think that's what it's all about. so i will go to the south now and probably never talk to the press corps of any kind again but i wish you all well. please remember, what my troops do at gitmo is a mission that them.resident has given they do it honorably, they do it are tly, and those guys transferred, and until that facility is closed, those men will be taken care of in exactly the way i've been told to take care of them. so thanks very much. appreciate it. >> next, republican presidential candidate ohio governor john kasich holding a town hall new ng in exeter, hampshire. then house homeland security congressman mccaul from texas, on the two refugees from texas. and after that, congressman ed royce of california discussing national security issues. >> here's a look at some of our featured programs this weekend
on american history tv on c-span 3. president obama will deliver his last state of the union address to a joint session of congress. this saturday and sunday, eginning at 1:00 p.m. eastern, will feature four state of the union speeches by former presidents during their last year in office. on saturday, it's president jimmy carter followed by on sunday,eagan, and president george h.w. bush's inal state of the union, followed by president bill clinton. star of day at 10:30, the musical "hamilton" receives he presidential achievement award. and sunday morning at 10:00 on road to the white house rewind, look back at the 1984 presidential campaign and a debate between eight democratic in candidate. >> the person we elect to replace that man has to have the confidence of the american people and has to be on matters spoken in public and private. private promises and public statements for the american
people has to be the same. for all our people. >> for the complete schedule go to c-span.org. students around the country are studentcam c-span's documentary contest, telling us he issues they want the presidential candidates to discuss. through social media, we're following students as they produce their videos. here's a plea from indiana, anterbury school teacher tweeted, eighth grade students were excited to hear real ben carson address gun control for their student cam. and another from maryland, casey easton rincipal at iddle school tweeted, two ems students interviewed former u.s. holder for their c-span video, wow. and at effing ham high school earlier today, i was interviewed by students for their c-span project. there's $100,000 in prizes with a grand prize of $5,000. the deadline is january 20, 2016
and the winners will be announced on march 9. for more information, visit our web site, studentcam.org. > now, republican presidential candidate and ohio governor john discusses the economy, job creation, balancing the budget, education, and national security. primary is shire scheduled for february 9th. this is about an hour and 20 minutes. ary is 9th.duled for the [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org]. >> this is about an hour and 20 minutes.
>> good evening, >> good evening, i'd like to begin by inviting to you stand allegiance. john: i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. i should also begin by both embarrassing and welcoming my wife and daughter to the town hall meeting. i do that because if i don't, my mother will find out about it and she won't talk to me. [laughter] john: i first got to know john kasich in 1996, when i was elected to congress, representing exeter in the first district in new hampshire. i was assigned to the budget committee. he was the chairman. and from the first day i met him, i knew that this was the kind of leader that i wanted to emulate. he was tough. he was conservative.