tv Public Affairs Events CSPAN December 20, 2016 4:28am-7:01am EST
the prosperity and growth experienced in the years after world war ii were an aberration and we are now coming back to reality. be sure to watch washington journal, live this morning at 7:00 eastern. join the discussion. >> tonight, a conversation with oxford nor, jerry greenfield -- with entrepreneur, jerry greenfield. here's a look. i because, you know, ben and wanted to have a little ice cream shop. we want to make an scoop ice cream to our customers. when we found ourselves becoming , we really did not like it. students,ys who are
you may have grandparents who lived through the 60's -- the 1960's. you guys have read about the 60's and history books and peace and love and hippies and all that stuff. we had all of these negative feelings about is this. -- about business. we were going to get out of business. ben had a friend who convinced him if there are things we do if weke about this, thought of businesses as these entities that took advantage of employees or spoiled the environment or exploited communities, that is the way we saw business. that if we did not like those things, we could change them. we could make our business anything we wanted it to be.
we made a conscious decision to try and have our business evolve to something that supported employees, supported the community and did >> tonight, a look at entrepreneurs. on creative and responsible business practices and of look at diversity in silica and valley. that is at 8:00 p.m. eastern here on c-span. british prime minister theresa may testifies today on the process for the uk's exit from the european union. we're live from the house of commons liaison committee at 9:00 p.m. eastern on c-span two. ♪
[applause] presidential inauguration of donald trump is friday, january 20. c-span1 have live coverage. -- will have live coverage. watch live on c-span and c-span.org and listen live on the free c-span radio app. now, a look at the u.s.-japan relationship and the growing role of science and technology in national security and defense strategy. this 30 minute event was hosted by the hudson institute. was offsetng remarks strategy. i mentioned my own firm conviction that the third offset strategy at the pentagon will provide one of the important building blocks and connective tissue for future u.s.-japan
defense technological cooperation. let us find out more about that third offset strategy from two insiders as it were who understand and in many cases have helped formulate that third offset strategy and its many facets and implications. it is my great pleasure to introduce our next panel. andrew, whose -- who is a , he assumedd panel his position in march, two after serving for 21 years as president of a premier washington think tank. his service was preceded by 21 career- by a 21 year with the u.s. army. he has also served in the department of defenses
assessment and on the personal staff of three secretaries of defense. he currently serves as chairman of the chief of naval operations panel and on the advisory --ncil of business exam business executives for national security. our other panelist is dr. william schneider, my colleague here at the hudson institute and president of the international planning services incorporated a washington-based international trade and financial advisory board. dr. schneider was formerly secretary of state for science and technology in the 1980's. he served as associate director for international affairs at the offices of management and budget. asore being nominated undersecretary and he served as advisor to the u.s. government
in several capacities, almost endless capacities as his understanding of military and scientific affairs is i think unparalleled in this town and in the think tank world. he also served as chairman of the president's general advisory committee on arms control and disarmament and has served on the defense science board since 2011. -- 2001. gentlemen, my question to you as is --in this discussion how did this third offset strategy come to be formulated and how do we see it's shaping up as something that will end up being more than just an empty slogan or catchphrase that circulates in the pentagon for a number of years as what happened " and"transformation becomes a solid, grounded, and
concrete new way of thinking about how we will fight in the six generation? this both have views on but i think the third offset is a concept, whether it retains that name or some other, reflects the way in which the u.s. all caps to the technology that it needs for national .efense to the threats posed the u.s. has historically had a strong predisposition to using technology to solve problems, whether it was in civil society or with defense. we have always had a labor shortage in the u.s. we have always preferred to use technology as a way of mitigating these kinds of shortfalls. and the modern history of this in the is rooted
soviet-american rivalry in the cold war where the immediate aftermath of world war ii left with amer soviet union huge manpower presence in central and eastern europe and that offered them a powerful advantage in conducting conventional military operations because these forces could be concentrated. by the introduction of short range theater and nuclear systems in the 1950's and 1960's, we were able to force the soviet first echelon forces to disperse and the spanish -- and diminish their forces as a powerful and -- force. the capability lost credibility as it became self determining. when you are trying to shoot 30 rounds of nuclear artillery per
day for 30 days it did not seem very credible. need to evil into the deal with the ultimate problem which was the russian second and third generation capabilities and andrew marshall was very effective in propagating the convergence of the technologies that made it possible to, in effect, defeat without firing a arrayed soviet forces in central and eastern europe by the convergence of the technologies of precision, navigation, and guidance with persistent surveillance. it enables the u.s. and nato forces to completely expose the second and third echelon soviet forces to distraction. and that contributed to the
ability of president reagan and president bush to wind up the cold war without the kind of warfare we had constituted. now, we are in a new environment, post-cold war where the defense science board has done several studies on this problem. where the technology of modern warfare is now more or less universally available. almost any country can get hold of this technology and as the admiral suggests, china is perhaps the most powerful use of this in universally available technology for military purposes. other countries are doing the same thing, perhaps on a different scale including itron ran, northkorea -- i r
korea. to find a constructive way in which we can defeat these ofhnologies along the lines the remarks that the admiral mentioned. this shows an effort to do so. sure i havem not much interesting to say after admiral coda and dr. schneider. let me give you my twist on the issue. first, i think the third offset strategy is as dr. schneider term but term but at the core what we are talking about is strategy. and we all know the basic definition of strategy -- how you employees limited means to achieve the ends that you seek.
but if you dig a little deeper, you see that strategy is also core, identifying, developing, and exploiting advantages against your adversary while at the same time recognizing those advantages that you have that are becoming what was called in the early wastingthe cold war, assets. advantages that are fading away. and your adversary is constantly trying to make your advantages wasting assets and develop new advantages of their own. and there is a constant competition that goes on. and as was mentioned by dr. schneider, we have this ignore miss advantage after world war ii where we had a nuclear monopoly. that became a wasting asset when the russians tested their nuclear weapons in august, 1949. we were confronted with a strategic choice about what to do.
the choice was do we build up our conventional forces and a lee's been conference -- and a lisbon conference and nato in 1952 there was a commitment to build up -- divisions. which sounds fantastic these days. president eisenhower after elected said that this was going to be a long-term competition. we do not know when this competition with the russians is going to end. and he made a strategic choice. he said in a long-term competition an important source of advantage for us will be the industrial base and the economic base of the countries of the free world. that is how we will prevail in this long-term competition. and so he said we are going to take this nuclear advantage that we have as long as we can to allow the europeans and our
japanese allies to rebuild their economies and technological basis. .- bases and that strategy worked in the sense that it exceeded in rebuilding these economies and technical bases until about the 1970's when not only did the russians as dr. schneider said have a manpower advantage, conventional forces advantage in europe but also caught up to us in terms of nuclear capability. and those of us who were around then remember this malaise and what are we going to do and handwringing. there were a number of people in the pentagon that looked for another source of advantage. it in technology. they found it in information technology. the united states and the rest of the advanced industrial economies were shifting from an industrial base to an industrial
information-based hybrid technology. this was something that soviet russia did not seem able to do. i was purchasing sony television sets and hewlett-packard pocket calculators. i was not buying any that were made in soviet russia and neither were you. and people like harold brown and william perry and andrew marshall saw the potential. as a new source of advantage. a new source of competitive advantage. said, dr. or schneider you could apply this advantage in a lot of ways. and as the admiral said, we used to lay the of fti, groundwork for the original battle networks. we used it in submarine quieting. we used it in decision never -- precision navigation and timing. precision guided weapons. there were a lot of ways we could leverage this advantage
and this advantage paved the way for what some people called the revolution in military affairs in the 1990's. the advent of american battle networks combined with decision weaponry. first in the case of the two areas of major damage, this advantage has now become a wasting asset as both the admiral and the doctor has said. china's development of these capabilities with chinese characteristics if you will. and so the question is if that ourhe case, if now dominance in battle networks and precision warfare are becoming a wasting asset or are at least being offset by the chinese, where do we go next? i would argue and i think echoing dr. schneider, i do not think the answer is found in the 1950's or 1970's. i think the answer is found in the 1920's and 1930's. as dr. schneider said, a lot of
the technologies, and of course militaries over time are becoming more capital intensive. if you look at the shifts, to a great extent technology is a great component. 1930's, you had these commonly available technologies. the commercial sector was driving a lot of what was going on. the automotive industry with mechanization, the aviation industry, the radio. the military take some of this and adapts it. the radio becomes not only radio but radar. and the question is, what differentiated the militaries that got it right in that period. for those that got it wrong. technology is widely available. and as the doctor and admiral said, it is widely available today. where is artificial intelligence advancing? where is big data, robotics?
it is not occurring in los alamos, it is occurring in the commercial sector. we can refine it and redirect it. but just as in the 1920's and the 1930's, there were three keys in terms of who wins and who loses. the first one is identifying what you are trying to do. what is your purpose? and so the purpose of germany was to win a quick war against poland and france. britain to af great extent was to defend itself from strategic aerial attacks. different problems for different countries. different objectives. what differentiated them was number one, trying to identify what you are trying to do. i would say that today what we are trying to do in terms of the defendpan alliance is to the first chain. ofermine china from acts
coercion against the first island change. if you do not know what you are going to do, it is hard to leverage technology in a way that makes it most effective. for example, the german military leverages aviation, mechanization, and radio to create blitzkrieg. the american and japanese technologies build their fast carrier networks. a different have objective and they are operating in a different domain. and number one, what are you trying to do. the second is figuring out the operational concept. how will you deploy this technology to maximum effectiveness. see a greatou example that the americans use. the french army and the german army. both have tanks and radios. both have aircraft.
but the germans figure out how to put them together in the best way possible. and the third is time. who can do it faster? who figures out the new way of four first? who ever figures it out first has a decisive advantage which is why the british navy does not perform particularly well in the pacific war whereas the japanese and american navies perform at a high level. the third is time. it is very much a time-based competition. and i think as dr. schneider said, this is not something -- offset strategy, the term may go away but there is an objective reality here. this is not dependent on a pentagon slogan but what we have experienced in the fat -- in the past. whether the name changes or not, the challenge for us will remain
and whether or not we succeed will depend on these three factors. thank you. >> these are very important remarks especially the part the vitaltegy and dimension that it imposes on trying to figure out the best way to use our access to these technologies. but one of the other dimensions that is also very important at a subsidiary level is a recognition that advanced we havegies such as been discussing and technologies that are now being introduced is ist their importance particularly profound with respect to the creation of new concepts of operation. we have discussed for example the application of unmanned underwater vehicles and the
possibility of the seabed becoming much more transparent with highly instrumented seabed. that will create a requirement for much different concepts of operation then we have heretofore become accustomed. veryor this, we need a creative defense establishment including especially the officer corps that are able to adapt quickly to these kinds of operations. somethingk that is that sometimes is given too little attention with a preoccupation with the technology. there are many different ways in which the technologies can be applied. and it is only through the shaping of concepts of operation that are related to supporting and constructive strategy that the technology really makes a difference. and i think this is something
that we will need to take advantage of because the nature of the technologies that are on offer are moving much more rapidly than the experience we and had even in the 1920's 1930's where the technology was moving rapidly. a number of the enabling technologies for these advanced military capabilities are advancing at exponential rates. sometimes, it is hard to get your head straight on the phenomena of exponential rates. but if you think of taking a step up one meter each and do that for -- and do that 32 times, you have gone 32 meters. but if technology is advancing in 32 increments, and that goes incrementally, you are up to a billion. almost -- almost any technology
that has a property that can be converted into information, it has the property of becoming software and it is more vulnerable to technological change. the idea of a system having a 40 year life is obsolete in the sense that the underlying technologies that drive it are not hardware, they are algorithms. -- elder rhythmic evolution the algorithmic evolution of the military will move much more rapidly then we have previously discussed. that will create different needs and that will change concepts of operation that will enable a country or an alliance. but it also has industrial applications as well. how do we cooperate when the underlying technologies are moving very quickly? you need a kind of industrial organization that allows companies to go in and out of various markets.
perhaps you need to be more flexible with having companies fail simply because the technology changed -- technology change imposes demands to read to change that cannot always be done by a certain organization. there are a lot of things that have to be thought through on how we can do a collaborative industrial opportunity that is created by these new technologies. againould add to that using history as an example -- everyone in the 20's and 30's new aviation was an important thing. the question is how new and how important? there was a great struggle in our navy. doly on, what planes could was to help the battle line get into position. by scouting where the enemy
fleet was. the idea was that you want to to cross the t to maximize your firepower. so planes were very useful in going out a distance and scouting and helping you get into position. and then you wanted to keep their planes from scouting your fleet so you wanted to shoot down their planes. but at some point, wrote the american and japanese navy's realized you could use these planes for raids on airfields. we all remember that. navy wasct our own very much involved in developing those capabilities. but there was a transition point. said -- look, these all help our battleships and battle fleet but at some point, if aircraft can fly a very long distance and carry a heavy payload, these can ship -- sink these ships. everything changes.
and of course that led to the end of the battleship and the rise of the aircraft carrier and the submarine. if you look at things today, all within the concept of what we are trying to do as the admiral outlined for us -- i have had senior naval officers say to make -- is the follow-on to the virginia class attack submarine a much improved version of what we have or is it something very different? is the next attack submarine more like what we think of as an aircraft carrier today, a rather large ship? unmannedlaunches underwater vehicles? just as when did the transition occur with aircraft in the 1920's and 1930's, when is the transition going to occur now in terms of underwater vehicles? does a have to do with propulsion systems and the
ability to fuel? the ability to travel great distances? the ability to carry heavy payloads? the fusing of underwater unmanned systems. mobile smart minds start to look a lot like unmanned underwater vehicles. as dr. schneider said, there are so many different technologies moving forward on so many different fronts at such a rate of speed, it really requires very serious, sustained intellectual effort built around not only the technology but how can you leverage it and what are you trying to do? what is the ultimate political purpose of this military capability we are trying to build? we will want to move smartly to our panel at 10:30 a.m. but we do have some time for questions including mine which i will pose first. as moderator i claim that
privilege. as both of you know, there is a feeling in dod that the third offset strategy sits in an easy relation in which the way that dod thinks about its existing conventional forces. our president-elect has made it his motto, peace through he has clearly been thinking about this along the lines of building and increasing both spending and production levels in terms of conventional weaponry, ships for example. 350 ship navy. if you wear if i think president-elect trump in how to think about third offset strategy in relationship to existing conventional forces, what would you say to him? >> i think the third offset technologies that we have been discussing like unmanned
vehicles, artificial intelligence and so forth, can actually extend the life of existing systems. fourth-generation aircraft like f-15s and f-16s, if accompanied by swarms of unmanned aerial vehicles for example that are can to operate autonomously extend the life of these platforms so that the evolution of military capabilities and the application of military power in support of a particular strategy can survive with a mix of using,g systems evolved for want of a better term, third offset technology as we thatduce new capabilities are built around entirely new concepts of operation using technologies that are becoming available and can be applied for
military applications. -- my elevator speech would be that we have built a advancedthat is very but is used to operating in an environment that is passing from the scene. what the military calls a permissive environment. nobody goes after our muscle. nobody goes after our nervous systems. we get that to be out of bounds. the chinese are putting that into play. that would be my first point. my second point would be that i think of the three revisionist powers, china, in any way you want to calculate it, is the most dangerous. and we have talked about rebalancing to the western pacific but that is really a hollow phrase. again, what are we trying to do?
we are -- whatever we are trying do do and i assume it is to defend our position and maintain a balance of power, and deter the chinese, how can we do that? can we defend the first island chain? taiwan, and the philippines. do it withd to forward defense with reinforcements as the admiral says? with expeditionary forces? do we intend to fight as we did in world war ii with mobilization. we lose the first island chain but take it back. i do not think our allies would be happy to hear that posture. some talk about an offshore strategy. which essentially is blockade. but again i think that risks giving up the first island chain to get it back. depending on how you answer this and depending on what military
postures you want to pursue, you get different answers about the kind of military you need to have. we have not done the hard upfront thinking about this that we need to do. we have been going on program momentum. if it is there, we should be building it. a goodhink if we took hard look along the lines i have described, we could be getting some significantly different answers. >> now, time for questions. there is one right here in the front. please give us your name and affiliation. >> phyllis yoshida. , i was sitting at the u.s. council of competitiveness and we were talking about the exponential changes of technology and what implications that has for the workforce keeping up with it for u.s. competitiveness. what. have you given to that whether it be the industrial forces having to make these
inngs or the military forces terms of implementing and staying abreast of that change. >> the military establishment track recordgood of training people at all levels -- officer, enlisted, and civilian to keep up with changes in technology. the civil sector has done less well and i know a lot of ferment about apprenticeship programs and other kinds of training. we probably need to do something differently and what we have done in the past in order to keep up with it because the changes are much more rapid. but i believe also the ability to train people is much improved if we take advantage of it. sure i can answer your question properly, dr. schneider knows a lot more about this than i do. i would say again from a
strategy point of view, one thing we have ignored that our come infriends have not the mid-1990's, i think it was the general at their military --lege who made a statement the americans cannot fight a long war. and we will win a long war. and though their doctrine what they would prefer to do is to win a short, short victory. on the other hand, we spent a lot of time and effort during the cold war taking sure the soviets knew we could fight and prevail in a long war. we have given up on that. a big part of what we have ignored in that are things like strategic material stockpiles, whether our industrial base can surge production. you cannot surge production of a ford class carrier but you can of --production look
surge production of precision guided munitions. about what kind of posture we need to be in in order to convince the chinese how theyact no matter are thinking about it, aggression and coercion are not in their interest. >> thank you very much. to our panelists. thank you very much for giving us some ideas about not only where this third offset strategy has come from but where it is going. appreciate it very much. [applause] >> c-span's washington journal. live, every day with news and policy issues that impact you. coming up this morning, usa today investigative reporter lara unger will discuss usa today's investigation into drinking water systems of small communities across the nation which found people in many of
the systems were drinking untested, led into tapwater. everson talksk about his book "an extraordinary time." that theargues prosperity and growth experienced in the years after world war ii were an aberration and we are now coming back to reality. be sure to watch it c-span's washington journal. live, this morning at 7 p.m. eastern. join the discussion. in-depth, january 1, will feature a discussion of the presidency of barack obama. we are taking your phone calls, tweets, and facebook questions. the panel will include the white house correspondent and author of the presidency in black and white. and a close view of three presidents and race in america. the author of democracy in black, how race still enslaves
the american soul. and journalists and associate ,ditor of the washington post author of "barack obama: the story." now, more from the hudson institute with a look at opportunities for u.s.-japan military partnership. this is 40 minutes. ready to -- we have gone through certain evolutions. from theists department of defense, who was going to be here to speak on the a.d. is beyond
unable to join us. and so i asked andy if he was willing to step in and pitch -- and pinch-hit which he was game to do. groupher panelist for our is michael elsberry, my friend and colleague. senior fellow at the hudson -- whote who is a long has a long history and knowledge of u.s. dealings with china. he is someone who has served in a multiple of presidential administrations. assistant onl asian affairs to the office of the secretary of defense. the author most recently
" a"the 100 year marathon book on china's grand strategy and its approach to global affairs. a book that has been a bestseller not only in the united states and japan but has also been a bestseller in china. there is a chinese translation. michael, is that correct? >> yes, for internal use only. [laughter] what other translations has it gone through? taiwanese and it is coming out in hindi. >> 600 million readers eagerly awaiting the "the 100 year aragon" when it comes out in hindi. michael elsberry as i like to say -- what he does not know about china is not knowledge. delighted to have
him also as part of our panel and part of our discussion here. the question i want to post to -- whatyou is, beyond are the chinese going to do next when the u.s. comes up with a ad?nter response to a2 where do you see china moving next in its adaptations? to become the next generation of systems and the developments that are taking place here? >> is that addressed to both of us? >> whoever would like to field it first. >> to answer that question, you have to know a lot of what the chinese are rewriting about their grand strategy.
they see the military strategy part of grand strategy as only 10% of the weight of grand strategy. and your question focuses on military things and that would not be the way the chinese tragedy would approach it. their view on technology for example is very different from the u.s. and japan. their view on technology, i discuss in a long chapter in my book, is the best technology is what you can get from other people, other countries. fundet other countries to your national science system, that is why they have 100 agreements with the u.s. national science foundation. that is why we have a team in beijing headed by the minister counselor in the embassy for science and technology. and u.s. transfers almost all
science and technology made by the national science foundation or other to those itgencies made grants to. we transfer that all too china almost immediately. as a joke the embassy has told me that the chinese will complain if they read about something and it has not yet didn't deliver to their ministry of science and technology. so their view of technology is in part based on their grand strategy that to surpass the americans, which they first laid out as a goal in 1955, to catch up and surpass the americans, was a goal of chairman mao himself. to do that, they have a set of comprehensive national power sectors. and the most important sector they decided, fairly recently, in 1980, is technology, science
and technology. all the leaders of communist to aes try to make a claim new discovery in marxism and leninism. -- it is not done here in america but it is a big deal for lenin and khrushchev and then die choking had his claim. how did he pioneer his philosophy? he made the discovery that science and technology is a greatest source of economic growth. china had not been focused on that from 1949 until 1980. after that, they began to do a whole series of things. for example, the president of china would hand out and innovation cash award to a winner and it would appear all over china in newspapers and on television. their program with the americans was not just a national science foundation. they did a survey under early
president reagan's time of all of the things that they wanted to develop starting in 1983. they found that most of what they wanted things like biotechnology, supercomputers, genetics for agriculture, the leader in the world was the americans. years now, that program has been remarkably effective. for the chinese. in america, it is almost unknown. i tell the story in the 100 year marathon where once we had a hearing of a gentleman from the department of state and some others about the cooperative agreements to help chinese scientists and technology including military science by the way. there was a defense reform commission set up right till perry to provide military technology to china. we also sold six weapons systems to the chinese including torpedoes.
a personal project of john lehman. and other kinds of intelligence technology. i have a chapter in the book about the 12th over action cooperation episodes between the u.s. and china. offered them in 1973, a direct hook up with our early warning satellites and said in a top-secret eyes only memo just declassified a few years ago -- we will provide you radar technology to make that are used of the intelligence and warning we will be giving you in real time because your bombers are all on one base and you need to be able to scatter them with early warning technology. so, i am trying to lay out for you what i cover in a couple of chapters in the book. of is the grand strategy china plays down the military spending in the military strategy. you miss understanding what
china is up to if you look at the military side. acronym notntagon used by the chinese. they do not describe what they have been doing for the last 10 years in our vocabulary. their version of what they are doing is back to the 1955 challenge by chairman mao. had a list of indicators, a net assessment. assessmentnd of net about how we would surpass the americans. sincet time, they have changed this but at that time, it was steel production, the single most important major by which they would surpass america. that led to an episode in which between 20 and 30 million people died. it was not predicted by u.s. intelligence by the way in 1958. it was called the great leap forward.
all over china, they set up communes and canteens for free lunch and they began to set up backyard blast furnaces. why? the americans in this single indicator of net assessment. and ileft, the doctor used to sit at the same time in that assessment. in the fall of 1992. you were drafting something that later became known as the revolution in military affairs and you were discussing the cover letter that our boss andrew marshall would sign to disseminate it and you told the ofry of -- in a couple books. i was then working what was -- on what was china's grand strategy. have anyed we did not books about chinese strategic thinkers. that led to a major effort which is today 100 books on chinese strategic thinking. what in the military sphere, if
you pressed me on what they would do to counter whatever the u.s. is doing to counter their a2ad, they are playing a bigger game. they know they have a trillion dollars to spend for defense over the coming decade. there was a study done by the rand corporation that came up with that number while we will be trimming our defense budget by the same amount during the same period. in that pattern, they are thinking more on a global basis. a lot of china experts used to swear on a bible as it were that china will never develop two things. it was a definition of what a hegemon is. the two things were an aircraft , aircraftr plural carriers, and the second was a
global military base network. colonel.se her know -- he was demonized here by the few people that knew about it as a not. he is a friend of mine in china. he made the papers yesterday with some comments about the drone in beijing. time, the consensus has changed so that now to books that have come out in the last few years called science and strategy both say that china needs a global military base network and something new has been added -- china needs to stop the american domination of to block china needs the american domination of the cyber warfare domain.
this has been added in the last few years. if i were looking for things to follow in what china was doing in its military strategy, i would be looking at space and cyber. if you sell the testimony in april, seven dod officials or officers from space command testified about the new threat from space. several of them used the word "china." then they had to go into closed session to discuss it in detail. but that testimony reminded me of a moment when the doctor and i were in net assessment. a large amount of money was given to a man who will remain anonymous to do a study. chinese capability in space technology. he was highly qualified. he came back with a 300 page report. to summarize it in one sentence -- china cannot do anything in space technology. ahead, we and the soviets are so far ahead in the manufacturing processes, the
batteries, a long list of inks, they will never be able to do anything. that was wrong. a series of assessments about china were wrong. and in many cases what you find was interviewing chinese about china's intentions and capabilities. and unlike americans who are very proud of a comp, achievements -- of accomplishments and achievements, some would say to the point of arrogance, the chinese approach to strategy is the opposite. you talk yourself down. you say you cannot do anything and you do not want to. the reaction to my book laying footnotes from chinese materials about china having a strategy to replace us. you know the reaction in china including by the vice foreign minister last week? this is nonsense. china has no strategy.
this is their official position publicly. public diplomacy. china has no strategy. it is not secret. and we have no desire to replace the united states. >> before we get to andy's comments, these technical assistance programs that the u.s. provided to china, those have all stopped now that we have the new situation? >> know, if you go to the national science foundation website, you will see the program is described there. it is growing. and in fact, nsf has a bonus. if you are an american researcher and you want to study big data to mine in real-time false information. for theant to do that nsf and you have a china cooperative partner, you get additional funds for your project. this is a huge disconnect between people that speak of china as a threat which is still
the minority in our government and the mainstream view that china is our biggest cooperative partner in the world. we do things with china, we have done things with china we would never do with japan. we do not do covert action with japan. japan does not have a cia to do covert action. we cooperate with the chinese in a number of ways including technology that we do not cooperate with japan or other allies and partners in the same way. this is reality and it is shocking to many people. i noticed your brilliant report when you talked about fujitsu buying technology and technologists -- buying technology in texas. we have been doing that with china for quite a long time. and it is not the sale of weapons was stopped in the tiananmen incident in 1989 but defense technology is still a
matter of negotiation. is it dual use? could they buy it from another country? systems, theres are controls on that. and some advanced technology but in the dual use technology, before something gets on the list to be denied to the chinese, it can already be sold because it has not been turned into a munition or a tool used technology yet. >> andy? of what michael said about the chinese false modesty about being good strategists or ago, oneral years meeting of the defense policy secretary gates was defense secretary, henry kissinger commented that the chinese were the best strategists that he ever came up against. [laughter] our response to what the chinese are doing and
how they might respond to us -- again, i pound home my earlier point. we have to decide what our response is. we have not decided to do that yet. and unfortunately, time is not on our side. we need to get our act together. in the broadest sense, i think we have to decide whether area denial is the new normal. is our traditional way of projecting power becoming obsolete, is it a wasting asset? and if so, what is our response to that? which ione response developed with some colleagues call the air sea battle and elaborated on in a foreign affairs article on arc up logic defense talks about defending the first island chain.
is the new normal, we need to establish our own defenses along that chain. we need to do it in terms of forward defense because as the admiral said, it will be increasingly difficult to reinforce. to have the bulk of your forces at a great distance and have to move them against this new normal, is a very risky proposition. moreo over time creating of a forward defense posture. at the same time though we have the regimee that if is going to be supplanted, it is supplanted by us. in other words, we need to be the ones that -- if you want to use a historical -- his story -- analogy. trench warfare.
we also, like the germans, need to figure out how to restore offensive capability. and you do not want to be the second one in a race with china to be able to do that. there is a dual requirement on our part. one is to develop an offset to the china a2ad capability but abilityto develop a new to overcome that defensive regime. i think the admiral they've us some clues on how to do that. interesting strategic question. if we do develop these kinds of technological -- technologies and capabilities will be whether to pursue what michael talked about which is something -- which is sometimes referred to as the second move advantage. how much do you begin to divest what you have and move into a new regime or do you want to take advantage of the first move to be the first to
move into a new area of military competition. being an amateur historian, the british practiced the second move advantage for much of the 19th century and shifted to the first move advantage in the early part of the 20th century in respect to the naval competition. but to make one final point, part of this effort i think will be to look at what i call the scouting competition which is sort of a shorthanded way to 4isr.about c who can see and move information about what is happening on the battlefield. and the salvo competition, who can win the exchange of fire. part of that to give you a sense -- because we just had these briefings on proof -- intercept, they are all valuable but we need to think more broadly and deeply about these things.
for example, if we are concerned about a major advantage that the chinese have which is a large plastic missile force, supposedly armed with conventional warheads, we are banned the -- from that because of the imf treaty. that is a key part of them holding at risk a lot of our ability to strike back, forward basis, aircraft carriers. we have a lot of eggs in very few baskets. getting back to the point of the operational concept. way to think about whether you can continue to have forward basis or whether they are too risky. whether you can continue to deploy carriers forward or if it is too risky. is inking about how you would do that? one way to think about doing that would be to bring a group of capabilities and technologies together. for example, if you have long-range strike systems that
can operate in non-permissive environments like the be 21 bomber for example or long loitering uavs. then what you might be able to instead of a chinese missile attack on our forward airbases coming down in cell close or to use a metaphor, in a downpour, what happened when we had that kind of capability before was that said him hussein thosenot launch in cell because he was trying to hide his missiles. whiche down in a drizzle is a lot easier for missile defenses to deal with. satellite systems, uav systems, and so on, so that they can to do very good battle damage assessment. how much of the data do we
really get? did we break those hardened concrete shelters or not? there's another technology. that is something we worried about during the cold war. revisit fire to missile rates because they can't tell whether they got the base are not. the discussion among the marine corps these days, why can't we proliferate the number of places? inside these create what weo called during the cold war, the shell game. one aircraft could be at one of six basis, and you don't know which one because we knocked out your satellite. that means if you want to get the aircraft's to attack six bases, but our missile defenses cannot focus on the base where we know that we have the aircraft and ignore the others. it drives of their costs,
because now they have to realize that not only do they have to hit all six bases, but they have to assume that all our missile defenses are concentrated on that one base. this involves multiple kinds of technologies, all brought together. it's not just boost phase intercept, although that is important. it's a combination, and of course there are these technologies -- for example, it can help us with cruise missile defense, as well as power guns, and what the other 1 -- electromagnetic rail guns. you can begin to see how technologies play to this. problem, andard for that reason we haven't really tackled is yet. but it's a problem, i think, that is of strategic significance. our ability to do that and our willingness to do that, especially as allies, the need to do that together, i think is crucial. >> i will squeeze out some time
for questions from the audience. if anyone has -- >> i just wanted to mention the word taiwan. a test of whether we defend the first island chain or not, which andrew said this morning is what we are doing, the test would be whether taiwan is part of american events planning. it's pretty obvious it's not. >> we do not send air force planes, naval ships -- we used to have a two-star admiral in taiwan called the taiwan defense command. two-star also a general in charge of the military. two-taiwan in those days functd almost as part of the seventh fleet. there were exercises done against warplanes. there was intelligence cooperation. 1979 andwent away in
has never been restored. there is enormous consensus in our country not to restore it. sense is aome military partner that does not exist for the united states. if that were to change, then some of the ideas you mentioned would make more sense, but it's not going to change. even the telephone call to taiwan's so-called elected president, according to beijing, is -- our consensus is that was a big violation of our national consensus. if you can't take a phone call, how can you have joint exercises, a joint war plan, developed technology together -- and i will mention something else besides taiwan, if you are talking about china. in my the key concepts assassins maze chapter --
assassins maze is a chinese concept in which you must have cheaper technology than your opponent in that same sector. december 14, just after midnight, off honolulu, john paul jones fired two sm-6 missiles and shot down the simulated ballistic missile target successfully. the missile defense agency announced this on its website. it's actually a very big deal. not noticed in the united states. but the reaction in china -- they were curious to know the price of an sm-6. in japan i would think,, since the sm-3 program is described as a huge success, i would think japan would be interested in the sm-6 as well. >> we are. [laughter] >> we have one vote --
>> keen interest. >> the other thing to think about in terms of your larger question -- sometimes on the united states does something, it is misunderstood by the chinese in either a good way or bad way, from our point of view. i think a lot of americans, including me, thought being deployed in south korea would be a good thing. not from the chinese point of view. they put up a number of articles that the radar, when it is converted, takes hours to convert, when it is converted to long-range it has 1800 mile range. that covers the chinese icbm silos, all of them, and that is enough missiles at the site in south korea. the entire chinese icbm force, according to them, was neutralized. and fairly cheaply. this is kind of interesting. graphics a number of
they have published showing that what the radar an in japan can do. the chinese are thinking ahead, but they are asking what is the cost, of ballistic missile defense compared to these very, -26 cheap df-21 and antiaircraft carrier missiles? that's two things for you -- taiwan and the price of countering the opponents. >> that's right. andy? -- like talkedng about the chinese looking at multiple dimensions. one thing that really strikes me about taiwan, and i hadn't thought of this until a colleague raised the issue in his book, is to some extent taiwan really functions in a similar way to west berlin in the cold war, in the sense that you have this alternate system
sitting next to the system that the ccp has created. for the chinese people, that system represents the alternative in terms of material well-being, personal freedom, individual liberty, lack of environmental protection, openness to the outside world. i think from a political point of view, apart from the strategic military issues that michael raised, anson incredibly important role that taiwan plays in terms of the ccp and its ability to argue that it's legitimate. it offers a legitimate best pass for the chinese people. and the other of course is to the extent that we are self-limited in our ability to cooperate with the taiwanese, perhaps over time are japanese friends will not be so self-limited. >> dr. kissinger made a promise to the chinese -- america will
not allow japan to play a role in taiwan's defense. burzynski revealed this of henry kissinger in his own memoir, when it was first made public. .> several comments first, science and technology. i recommended to create some form of technology containment strategy against china. that is our concern. provide is so kind to vital technology to china. that is really against our policy. about the u.s. is serious thinking of china as a future potential friend, it is a time
for two nations, japan and the create some form of technology containment against china. without that, we would lose the race. thing, second keeping u.s. forces in our area china, steel, the largest obstacle in threat, has been the u.s. navy and air force and marines, and it will be so in the future. if this is the reality, japan and the u.s. have to -- one thing. protecting the first item, especially in japan, is not the u.s. responsibility.
that is our role. protect responsible to our own land, including islands. we don't ask you to come and protect our islands, rather, we want the u.s. military to show strike capability against china to deter. that is the basic miss ensure energy between japan and the united states. -- doest island chain japan have the capability? yes. outside of the navy, is larger than the side of the u.s. pacific fleet. size of the air force, a number of fighters is larger than the u.s. air force combined.
navy andctive protective air force are conducting a defensive role in the region. the one thing lacking is strike capability under the japanese constitution. that is what we want. if this happens, china will have done it. the last thing -- please think about that. geography and geopolitics. whatever the chinese navy and future,e have in the they are still contained in the south and east china sea. especially in the south china sea. we will be able to keep the very and thein the bottle south china sea is the
container. the line connecting taiwan, the vietnam, thatnd is the outer container. -- i am not to do discussing the current status, but what we need to do is a new concept -- how to protect the outer skin of the thermos, taiwan in the philippines. we need to develop new ideas and to keep that outer skin of the thermos hot enough to contain china within the internal jar. leaste same is true -- at
a robust defense for supported by u.s. strike capabilities. job,hina, it's not an easy today theycept -- are free to transit the strait -- at the same time, we have problems. that is why is saying three things -- please boost missile defense capabilities and cruise missile defense capability. together we sabotage. that is the responsibility , that is the joint. . those are the things i wanted to say, thank you. >> i do have to go on the problem here -- in terms of
fleet ballistic missile defense i think that's extremely important within the context of a more broad, comprehensive approach to missile defense. i think it's an interesting question for the japanese fleet -- in a crisis, will they still stay in port and be highly vulnerable? and if american aircraft carriers are concerned about coming close what with the position be of the japanese fleet? how close are you at sea? what is your alternate basing? what are your alternate logistics? how are you going to break a blockade of japan? how? china blockading japan. what? >> we will block the threat. >> they can hit your -- >> in the base --
[crosstalk] >> -- the can target your ports was listed missiles, they can employ in position smart mindes -- right. say, for thing i would me, one of the interesting moves in terms of china moving into the south china sea, obviously there are resources there, but what strikes me is say, for if we were playing a game with the chinese, they have moved some stones into very interesting positions, which if we don't respond have put us in a position of losing a lot of our strategic depth in southeast asia and the philippines. yes, well you know how to play, but the americans may not. yes, absolutely. >> went the question. if-- one quick question. would you support japan's
creating an office of net assessment like we have in the pentagon? >> yes, i think it's a very useful way of thinking about these kinds of. >> thank you. >> michael, thank you so much. michael, is there a japanese translation -- >> yes, i'm going to give it to everyone. >> he's got it already. [laughter] >> i want to thank our panelists for what has been a really fascinating discussion. [laughter] [applause] i want to put in one final word. the story today, in global times, that seafood from the south tennessee is now on sale in i want to put in one final word. beijing. chinese consumers are finding these seafoods very good. they even taste better than seafood from the east china sea.
the upshot of the article, and also the online comments, the upshot of it was that as china's presence grows in the south china sea, that this will be an economic boom for people living around the south china sea. the fisherman, for example, will have a new market that will open up for them, and what we see with china's growing role is the promise of economic prosperity radiating out through to the shores of the countries that border on the south china sea. that article is, i think, a good reminder -- not just before lunch -- it's a good reminder of a2ad strategythe is not only taking place in the military or in the economic sphere, but also in the information domain. i think that's an interesting example, and the comments that go with it -- >> the chinese name for ada2 is
counter intervention strategy. >> yes, absolutely. >> c-span's "washington journal," live every day with news and policy issues that impact you. coming up this morning, usa today investigative reporter thea longer will discuss investigation into drinking water systems of small communities across the nation, which found people in many of these systems were drinking untested tapwater. then, an author talks about his book "an extraordinary time: the end of the postwar boom and the return of the ordinary economy. his book argues that the prosperity and growth experienced in the years after world war ii were an aberration, and that we are now coming back to reality. be sure to watch "washington journal," live this morning at 7:00 a.m. eastern.
join the discussion. look aton c-span, a monday's electoral college vote. then we talked to newly elected representative adriana beso espaillat, of new york. >> president obama rent and clemency monday to 231 people, the largest number issued by a president in u.s. history. 153 people have their sentences commuted, another 78 were pardoned for their crimes. today, the brookings institution looks at criminal justice and civil rights under the obama admistration, live at 12:30 p.m. eastern here on c-span. later, another event from the brookings institution, looking at economic growth and equality and how it can be improved in the u.s. and europe. that's live at 5:00 p.m. eastern. >> c-span, where history unfolds
daily. in 1979, c-span was created as a public service by america's cable television companies, and is brought to you today by your cable or satellite provider. >> a 2016 campaign that began more than two years ago today moved to its final stages as electors met in state capitals around the country -- in fact, 538 electors in all 50 states and here in washington, d.c. -- to give donald trump the 270 votes he needed to become our 45th president. he will be sworn in on january 20, on the west front of the u.s. capitol. let's take a look at the popular vote results from november 8. as you can see, donald trump, republican states in red. hillary clinton, democratic states in blue. three key states that flipped for the republicans -- pennsylvania, michigan, wisconsin. according to our founders and
the u.s. constitution, "the electors shall meet in their respective states and vote by ballot for president and vice president, one of whom at least shall not be inhabited of the same state with themselves; they shall been in their ballot the person voted for as president, and into distinct ballots, the person voted for as vice president. they shall list that person voted for as president and all persons voted for as vice president, and the number goes for each, which they shall sign and certify to the scene of the united states directed by the president of the senate." that last step in the process will take place in early january. joining us from the newsroom, stephen shepard, who has been following all of today's developments. thank you for being with us. >> good to be here. >> put this into context. this is required by the constitution.
-- >> you mentioned michigan, pennsylvania, wisconsin. that they could get 36 of the electors to vote for somebody else other than donald trump, that would deny him the majority of the electors and it would go to the house of representatives despite a furious campaign to do that, we didn't see it. you mentioned michigan, pennsylvania, wisconsin. all the electors in those states voted for donald trump. we did see a few democratic electors peel off. it was an effort to join with potential republican defectors. three,colin powell got not because of the democratic electors, they were hoping to deny donald trump. one elector in washington state voted instead for another candidate, because they didn't want to vote for hillary clinton. this is more than we usually see.
you have to go back to 2004 to find another faithless elector, widespread kind of defection that would have threatened donald trump's chances to be the next president. >> and yet we saw the effort by the hamilton electors. we saw texas, one of the faithless electors, a republican, which is key. it's getting a lot of attention. too much media attention, based on that happened today? >> i don't know if it's too much -- it does draw some attention to the system by which we elect our president. maybe the electoral college -- in some states, the electors for filled will of the people, or at least the people who were allowed to vote. in some states, the people -- there was no popular vote and the electoral college just chose to they wanted. in this case, we have a system where it's 51 individual state elections.
i think it sheds some light on the process. that said, look, obviously this was -- if you read the coverage and thought this was in doubt, maybe it got too much coverage. but by and large this really wasn't in doubt. it shed some light on quirks of our system. host: we were live in new york and in michigan and pennsylvania and illinois. there really was a majesty and a simplicity to the process, putting those paper ballots, because there weren't a lot of ballots to be counted. in each of these states, that is what it looks like. guest: the pageantry is the word i would use to describe it. we are going to see the same thing you mention in early january. a joint session of congress convenes to count the votes. this is not the last step in the process. the last step is to send these votes to washington and to have been examined and then counted before a joint session of the new congress in early january. vice president joe biden will
preside over that session. there is more pageantry to come. this is how we do things every four years. the reality of this year's election, one that got more attention than any election, and was more closely followed. the historicng is nature of it, a candidate who loses the popular vote nationally by such a wide margin, yet losing the electoral college by a wide margin as well. we have this unique situation and i think that has drawn more attention. host: we will come back to this. on politico.com you wrote about the transition and honeymoon period, or lack thereof, based on the very point you just made, which is that the nation -- we here on c-span -- the nation remains very divided. guest: very divided. , theavorability is at best percentage of americans who view him favorably is equal to those who view him unfavorably.
barack obama, george w. bush, elected under controversial circumstances, he had the benefit of the doubt from a lot of democrats. donald trump doesn't have that this year. that is going to create a tricky situation. republicans are going to control all levels of government in d.c., especially once the new supreme court justice joins. he will have the ability to implement his agenda at the beginning of his presidency. look at the first six months, the first year. those milestones -- a lot of presidents get a honeymoon period, and americans want them to implement their agenda. donald trump doesn't go in with. how far is he able to push the envelope before the american people push back, given that he encounters significant resistance? host: so the debate over the last nine weeks, from election night or morning until this monday in december, is one iowa republican -- "there was no way
we would see large-scale revolt on this electoral college day." guest: yeah, and we pose this question to everyday voters in this poll we conducted over the weekend. there wasn't a large appetite even among democrats for trying to disrupt the electoral college to overturn the results of the electoral college. that said, one thing that has an interesting -- americans still narrowly think we should elect our president according to the popular vote, and not by the college. it is difficult to amend the constitution but we have seen the movement over the past couple decades to get them to join with other states, to vote by way of the popular vote, and if enough states do that, they could then rig the electoral college to follow the popular vote. it will be interesting to see in years ahead how many states join that effort, and if we see a popular movement toward using
the popular vote. host: earlier today, we talked to professor robert hardaway about that point. it's on our website -- what would it take to change the electoral college? and also, the historical perspective on white was put in place. i want to get your reaction to albany, an historic moment, as a former president cast the vote for his wife, hillary clinton, who won new york but lost the electoral college. he was one of the electors in the state of new york. here's the scene from albany. >> we are also honored to be at this proceeding with many elected officials from all across the state, important citizens from all across the state, and one very special new yorker who we all called friend, former president william jefferson clinton. [laughter] [applause]
two separate boxes. that scene was repeated in state capitals across the country. a box for hillary clinton and tim kaine. back to the story in politico. some democrats criticized hillary clinton and her supporters for not embracing an effort to stop donald trump on this day. stephen shepard: you mentioned the hamilton electors who wanted to try by choosing another candidate who may also be palatable to the republican electors -- try to overturn the electoral college results. they were looking for a signal from the clinton campaign that this was an acceptable and desired outcome. we did not see that. that is why you saw only a handful of democratic electors peel off in that effort that i mentioned including colin powell. we did not see that. i think there was a clear effort. you heard that starting with hillary clinton's concession speech the day after the election. an effort to move on it publicly and not mount any kind of
challenge. they only tangentially joined the recount that jill stein had pushed for in those three states you mentioned including michigan, pennsylvania, and wisconsin. we have seen a couple of statements. you hear them when the clintons talk privately. they talk about the letter from the fbi director and how that turned the election. and there is perhaps a little bit of bitterness and regret. but publicly, we have not seen anything that jeopardizes this. >> the other argument we were hearing from those trying to block the electoral college vote for donald trump today included the russian hacking and what happened with the dnc and wikileaks saying that russia interfered in the election. we sense that there will be a congressional inquiry looking into what happened. but that argument also seemed to fall on deaf years leading up to today's electoral college votes. stephen shepard: a number of electors had petitioned to get
an intelligence briefing, access to classified information. their status as electors -- they do not have security clearances and they would not have access to that information. they wanted to be granted access to that. but by and large, those were democratic electors. they were not people ready to vote for donald trump in the electoral college. you did see clinton campaign chairman john podesta call for that intelligence briefing to be granted. while it is a source of concern for a lot of people including americans at home, it was not something that the donald trump electors as we can see from the vote, it was not something that they were considering on the whole. >> today, a day for civic students to better understand
the process as it unfolded across the state capitals. stephen shepard, as you have been doing surveys for politico, what questions have you been asking or have people been asking you about the electoral process? stephen shepard: the one thing that all reporters have heard involved in conversations with friends and family as well as notes from readers is -- you have heard it a lot -- is there any chance? people who wanted the electoral college to overturn the results of the election and those that did not -- if there was any chance of this? you mentioned the civic lesson. this happens every four years. c-span covers it. but by and large, we do not follow this closely unless it is embroiled in controversy. it is important for americans to understand the process by which we elect our president. if they are unhappy with it, they can get involved to
possibly change it. if you live in california or texas or wyoming or new york, you might not have a presidential campaign really active in your state. but it is important to be cognizant of that and the way things work in this country. sooner or later and probably sooner, we will start talking about the next presidential election and americans will be focusing on that very closely. >> your colleague who we spoke with earlier today, who are the electors? as we have been seeing, they are all citizens. there are very few public officials. stephen shepard: every state has a different way of choosing who these electors are. some are chosen by the state party. this is a sort of system that varies so much state-by-state. kyle has done a great job over the last few months of digging
into who these people are, finding out what they believe and think. in some of the states, washington state for example, there were some bernie sanders supporters who are among those that did not vote for hillary clinton today. that was not decisive. based on the ultimate margin. but it could have been down the stretch with a close election. it is important to note that this is something that people can do. you can try to sign up at home. it is not just, depending on the state, it is not only for the politically well-connected. >> stephen shepard, thank you for putting today's events into perspective. we appreciate it. you can read his reporting on politico.com and our campaign coverage is available on our website at c-span.org.
whereas here is a scene from the texas capitol in austin where a puttors for donald trump him over the threshold to win the presidency. the announcement was 36-1-one for donald trump, ron paul, and kasich. gentlemen, let us call back in order. our votes for president has been tallied. we have for president, donald trump, 36 votes. vote and for one john kasich, one vote. by the way, texas now puts president trump over-the-top. [applause]
>> good afternoon. as provided under the constitution of the united states, the laws of the united states, and the laws of the great state of michigan, the 2016 meeting of the electoral college is now convened and will come to order. please rise for the pledge of allegiance, led by the state representative, tom barrett. >> thank you.
of[ recitation of the pledge allegiane ] >> thank you, governor. >> if you would remain standing, thank you, tom -- at this point, i will invite another to come forward to sing the national anthem. >> ♪ o, say, can you see by the dawn's early light what so proudly we hailed at the twilight's last gleaming?
whose broad stripes and bright stars through the perilous fight o'er the ramparts we watched were so gallantly streaming and the rockets' red glare the bombs bursting in air gave proof through the night that our flag was still there oh, say, does that star-spangled banner yet wave o'er the land of the free
and the home of the brave? ♪ [applause] >> well, thank you for that wonderful rendition. that was outstanding. if everyone would be seated please, our invocation will be delivered by bishop ira. bishop combs: this time, if i may ask you to stand again for the invocation in honor of our governor and the lord and savior of our nation, who has made this
nation great. almighty and eternal god, el shaddai, supplying the needs of your people by the way of the cross, we bow our heads in the spirit of humility, giving thanks, praise, and adoration to you for the blessings of peace, tranquility, and prosperity you have bestowed on our great nation. we sincerely appreciate your divine intervention in america's most recent national elections and the clarity with which you spoke through the voice of the electorate. as we gather on this historic, magnanimous, and momentous occasion, to commensurate and to consummate the business of the electoral college and close the books on the controversial past and open a new chapter to open america's exceptionalism, did president-elect donald j. trump and vice president mike pence and the cabinet members to be
confirmed the wisdom, stability, foresight, and wisdom to govern with humility and to appoint with conviction based on our traditional values and the constitution. bless their families, loved ones, colleagues, and peers. bless our governor, members of the senate and house, electoral college, and the totality of our nation as a whole. god bless america, and let justice roll down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream. all of the people say amen. >> amen. bishop: say "amen" again. >> amen. >> thank you, bishop. nominations are now in order for the chair of the 2016 president
-- presidential electoral college. i will now recognize hank for the purpose of making a nomination. [indiscernible] >> the governor is doing a hell of a job. thank you. >> thank you, hank. do we have a second? we have got a second. hearing no other nominations, the nominations are closed. thank you. all in favor of governor rick snyder for the chair of the 2016 electoral college, signify by saying aye. all opposed, say nay. governor snyder is unanimously elected as chair of the 2016 presidential electoral college. thank you. thank you, please be seated and thank you for that honor.
[inaudible] >> you are a little out of order, but, john, what will you share with us? >> [inaudible] >> do you have a statement you would like us to enter? >> [indiscernible] >> ok. do we have a second? all in favor of having the statement read, say aye. >> aye. >> all opposed, say nay. you may read your statement. >> whereas the signers of the constitution understood the natural instinct to man to govern in such a way to benefit himself, their loved ones, and
those who may profit from them, and, whereas our founding fathers, guided by divine intervention, created a system in the document called the constitution of the united states of america, and whereas no president in the united states of america has ever been elected by direct popular vote but by a system described by the constitution of the united states of america and whereas article ii, section 1 states in -- each state should elect and such a manner the number of electors equal to whole numbers of senators, to which the state may be entitled in the congress, but no senator or representative or person holding office of trust or profit under the united states shall be appointed an elector, and whereas the state of michigan has two senators and 14 representative, michigan has been allotted 16 electors. these are elected at the state
convention with their respective districts with the party having positions, and whereas republican donald j. trump won michigan by the narrowest margin in michigan history, winning 306 electors to secure his place in history is a 45th president, we hereby recognize and thank the following electors for their willingness to serve in the electoral process and congratulate you for being bestowed the honor of representing your citizens of your district and the citizens of our great state of michigan. thank you. [applause] >> thank you. thank you. if you could please provide a copy of that to the secretary for the minutes. i would like to appoint the lieutenant governor brian kelly, secretary of state, attorney
general as assistant chairs. thank you for your service. please stand up. [applause] >> the senate majority leader as secretary, another representative as assistant secretary, and the speaker of the house as parliamentarian, and a state representative as the assistant parliamentarian. thank you for your service. all stand up now. [applause] >> i have not known such august people to be as shy as they are today. thank you, and thank you for your assistance. the role of the official electors for the president and vice president of the united states will now be called. indicate your presence by
stating here when your name is called. elector-at-large. hank hughes. hank, just yell out you are here. elector-at-large joseph guzman. first district, john haggard. second district, jack holmes. third district, kelly mitchell. fourth district, judy rapanos. fifth district, henry hatter. 6th district, robert weitt. seventh district, wyckham seeling. eighth district, ross ensign. ninth district, michael banerian. 10th district, brian fairbrother. 11th district, ken crider.
12th district, mary vaughn. 13th district, jim rhoades. 14th district, william rauwerdink. great, although there's -- all electors are present. the chief justice. [applause] chief justice: thank you. there are many occasions i have been blessed. none more poignant than this. will the electors please stand and raise your right hand? it looks like all of you figured out the right hand. good. [laughter] chief justice: now, do you solemnly swear you will support the constitution of the united states and the constitution of this state and that you will
faithfully discharge the duties of the office of elector of president and vice president of the united states, according to the best of your ability? congratulations. [applause] >> i would now like to appoint the sergeant of arms for the 2016 electoral college. from the 11th congressional district, and from the six congressional district, from the fourth congressional district, and andrea pollack of the third congressional district. please be recognized. [applause] >> thank you for your service. nominations are now in order for the office of president of the united states. i now recognize michael banerian for the purpose of the
nomination. mr. banerian: ladies and gentlemen, i have the privilege of standing before you for those that carries the hopes of democrats, republicans, and independents alike on his shoulders, a man who has been given the opportunity to restore the american dream, which has been out of reach for so many americans for far too long, so i ask you to stand with me for such a man and stand with me as i nominate donald trump for president of the united states of america. [applause] >> thank you.
do i have a second? multiple seconds. very good. are there any nominations for president of the united states? hearing none, i call for a ballot. to facilitate the ballot, i call for our sergeant of arms to step forward and distribute ballots for the office of president of the united states. please indicate your preference. by signing the name of the candidate for your preference. [crowd noise]
i recognize joseph guzman for the purpose of nomination. >> mr. chairman, it is a distinct honor to to nominate governor mike pence for vice president of the united states. governor: great, i appreciate that. do we have a second? we have a second. are there any other nominations for the office of vice president of the united states? hearing none, i call for a vote by ballot. sergeants, would you please step forward and distribute the ballots for the office of vice president of the united states? thank you
[applause continues] gov. snyder: congratulations to donald j. trump and mike pence for their elections. thank you for your good work. [applause] gov. snyder: we have more work to be done, though. we're going to put you to work again. it is now time to sign the certificates of vote for president and vice president. each elector must sign each of the six certificates to certify donald j. trump for the office of president of the united states and governor mike pence for the office of vice president of the united states. i invite all electors to come forward and sign the certificates. the sergeant-at-arms will begin releasing the electors one by one.
gov. snyder: thank you, electors, i appreciate your patience. i believe we completed the process. the 2016 electoral college will send one certificate by registered mail to the president of the united states senate and one to chief judge robert yonker of the united states district court for the western district of michigan. two certificates will be delivered to the michigan secretary of state and two certificates will be delivered
to the archivist of the united states, national archives and records administration in washington, d.c. i now invite all electors to come forward and sign the envelopes. the sergeant-at-arms will begin by releasing electors one at a time. now that you've signed those six, we have to put them in the appropriate envelopes with your signature, so we're asking you to get up and make another trip. this is in line with healthy michigan. you're getting your steps in today. [applause] [laughter]
gov. snyder: thank you, electors, i appreciate your patience. i appreciate your patience in the gallery. it's great to have such a great group of people here today to witness this historic moment. i thank you for that. our benediction today will be by bishop isaac combs. thank you for your invocation. you will have us have a strong close here. [applause] bishop: as we all rise in the spirit of humility, let us give,
the lord, a round of applause for this great victory this evening. put your hands together for donald j. trump and vice president, mike pence. [applause] we bow our heads at this time. now, lord, our heavenly father, we bow our heads again and in thanksgiving we reflect on this monumental and transformational victory that you have wrought in the politics of this nation that has had, lord god, an amazing experience on all of the continents of the earth. strengthen, now, the president-elect to carry out the planks and the platform of his campaign that he's promised to the american people. give us all the fortitude and constitution to stand with him as he executes the same -- jobs, a strong border, a stable economy, cut in taxes and protection of the life of the unborn.
now, oh, god, we ask that you send help from your sanctuary and bless our governor. look on the members of law enforcement. strengthen the rule of law. those in the military, protect them and engender their families and as we close this session, let us go and celebrate the holiday season with an attitude of appreciation and thanksgiving, world without end, the name of christ jesus, everyone say amen. >> amen. bishop: say amen again. >> amen. [applause] >> merry christmas, happy new year. >> thank you. [applause] governor snyder: thank you, bishop. we're almost done with the official business. one more act. the chair will now entertain a motion to adjourn. i have a motion, do i have a second? there has been a motion to adjourn and a second. all in favor signify by saying
aye. >> aye. governor snyder: all opposed, say nay. the 2016 presidential electoral college is now adjourned. will all official and honorary electors please move to the front of the chamber for purpose of taking a commemorative photo of michigan's 2016 electoral college and i thank you for your service today on electing a new president and vice president. thank you so much. [applause] >> c-span a spoke to some of the incoming members of the 115th congress when they came to the u.s. capital for their orientation. here is a look. ,> representative elect cabral
tell us your background. i am a formerral: state senator in new york and i will now represent the 13th congressional district including harlem and the northwest bronx. of -- whohe birthday first represented this district 70 plus years ago. i am happy to be representing this district. it is diverse. i am the first latin american member to be unelected across the country. i am looking forward to working with everyone. >> why do you think that is important? you were to get more dominican republic -- republicans elected into office. rep.-elect cabral: everyone in -- aspires to have government he the reflection of the demographics -- to be a reflection of the demographics
across the country. everyone wants a government they can identify with. folks from their own background -- that is very american to have a diverse government. is the, i think that strength of our government. is the strength of our government. >> what about your work at the state level --how will that help you in washington? rep.-elect cabral: i bring the thes, being a minority in senate to come to washington and get things done. there are a lot of areas that we can work together to bring jobs to the districts with good paying salaries. immigration reform is still an important issue that we must address. that be in our past. it is part of our present. education and housing are critical issues across the district. i hope to tackle these issues while being a minority in congress. we want to hear people's ideas
and make them part of the solution. seat that filling a was emptied by retiring charlie wrangle. what you hope to build on his legacy? rep.-elect cabral: the lion of lenox avenue. inse are two legends congress that walked these halls. these are big shoes to fill. but i bring my own vision, energy, a new insight into what the district wants. people are ready to turn the page and see a new dynamic development that is exciting. i will bring that with me and i hope to be just as good if not better than they were. they certainly contributed a lot to the nation and this district and i hope i can bring everyone together again under the same make things happen positively. affordability continues to be a major hurdle. >> you did challenge
representative wrangle in the primaries in 2012 and 2014. you lost. what lessons did you learn? rep.-elect cabral: i was taught not to mess with the lion from lenox avenue. he showed his realm of experience. it is something to learn from. he is a wealth of knowledge and i look forward to being his ally and he is my mentor it now. he has shown me around congress and he is walking around, getting me to meet the right people so i can be an effective legislator for everyone. >> what advice has he given you? rep.-elect cabral: come in early and leave late. work the midnight hours. make sure you get things done. the early morning hours of the morning or late at night. i will be a workforce -- a workhorse for the district. gentrification is also impacting our district.
>> tell us about your family. will they be joining you? rep.-elect cabral: i have a two-year-old grandson and my children are both grown. they will be staying back. i hope to bring my two-year-old grandson to see the capitol. i know when i came as a young boy, nine years old to first visit the capital, i could not even speak a word of english accent. i came here with my school. such a monumental place. and now i am here as a member of congress. great nation and great story. >> did you always want to serve? rep.-elect cabral: i have always had it in me to be a servant. me go to ther made hospital with her to translate for doctors visits. i began very early on. in college, i study political science and came out and became a state legislator.
i served 14 years in the assembly and the last six years in the state senate. >> what impacted your grandmother have on you? jeanette -- rep.-elect cabral: tremendous. she was a great worker with a great work ethic with great personal integrity. she is still very much the person that we look to even though she is not with us, when we have tough times. >> what would you like to do out here? what are some of the fight that you will wage here in washington? rep.-elect cabral: the affordable care act -- to preserve it. there will be an attempt to a salt it. it has good provisions in it for people with pre-existing conditions, for young people who are still part of their families, there are worthy, meritorious clauses in the affordable care act that need to be preserved. there is hostile rhetoric prevailing during the campaign.
we must worry about immigration and what will happen to over 12 million people that are here undocumented. people who are a very important part still of our economy. i want to be their champion. that that -- that their story is not left behind. we cannot put our heads in the sand. and pretend they are not there or that they should be sent back home. >> why? what is it from your life experience that makes you want to wage that fight? rep.-elect cabral: i came here with no papers myself and now i am a member of congress. we are fighting for the spirit of america. once, a long time ago, when i was a little boy in the dominican republic, the stories word that the streets were paved with gold and anything was possible. here, overstayed our visa, we became a citizen and i became a member of the state legislature.
and now i am a member of congress. great americans have walked these halls. this is a great nation that should provide opportunities for all. we should not be isolated from the rest of the world. we should be leaders in the world. did your family come here and make that decision to overstay their visa? rep.-elect cabral: like many other immigrants, we wanted to do better for ourselves. our grandparents were here and our family was here. we found this to be an equal opportunity for growth. our parents- thought we would do better as kids in the united states. we are very proud of that and i am and even prouder american. >> how old were you when you came? rep.-elect cabral: i was nine years old. i remember crossing the bridge from the jfk airport to new york and seeing all of the lights and all that the city had to offer. what a great view to see the
city lit up. i came from a small country town. to see new york lit up at night on my first walk in new york. >> thank you's much for talking to c-span. >> british prime minister theresa may testifies today on the process for the uk's exit from the european union. from the house of commons liaison committee at 9:00 p.m. -- at 9:00 eastern on c-span two. c-span, tonight at 8:00, jerry greenfield, cofounder of ben & jerry's ice cream talks about creative and responsible business practices. >> the idea that we could not sell on of ice cream in the summer in vermont to stay in business forced us to look for other markets. >> wednesday night, dick cheney and leon panetta on the future of the defense department under president-elect donald trump.
i think that the challenges are very great and we have unfortunately, over the course of the last many years, done serious damage to our capabilities to be able to meet those threats. there are a lot of flashpoints and a new administration will have to look at that kind of world and weiously defined policy that need in order to deal with that but then, develop the defense policy to confront that kind of world. >> thursday at 8:00 p.m. eastern, a look at the career of mike depends -- mike pence. >> we have stood without apology for the sanctity of life, the importance of marriage, and the freedom of religion. night, farewell speeches and tributes to several outgoing senators including harry reid, barbara boxer, kelly ayotte, and codes.
this week on c-span. >> follow the transition of government on c-span as trumpent-elect donald selects his cabinet and the republicans and democrats prepare for the next congress. we will take you to key events as they happen without interruption. watch it live on c-span. at c-span.org or listen for free on our c-span radio app. live today on c-span, washington journal is next. at 12:30 p.m., a look at civil rights and criminal justice reform under president obama. at 5:00, a look at economic growth and equality in the u.s. and europe. in 45 minutes, it usa investigative reporter talks about the investigation into the drinking water systems of small communities across the u.s. at 8:30 a.m., washington journal author week continues with market levers and.
-- mark leverson. ♪ it is december 20, 2016. you are looking at a live shot of the white house. this will be the scene of plenty of activity one month from today on inauguration day. preparations continue for the ceremony and festivities of january 20, donald trump took another step towards the white house by officially securing the electoral vote yesterday. we will get to that this morning. we begin our program in the wake of the deadly attacks overseas in turkey. a lone gunman shot until the russian