tv Public Affairs CSPAN May 29, 2013 5:00pm-8:01pm EDT
choice voucher. it's gone to be a three-year wait. we have tried every avenue we can think of. we have three children, like i said. the housing choice vouchers and the programs that you guys say are in place are not really a place, because they don't promise action soon enough so we can build our families up higher. host: produce a living falls is a suburb of louis, maine. it chose to move from the city to that area? caller: i have always been in the suburbs. i choose not to live in the cities because i think the role the city plays, especially if you have a low income, you move into the city areas that have more drug and alcohol abuse. i choose not to put my children in a situation like that read
they have to go to school and deal with those everyday issues of trying to at least produce a good life. host: what is the education like for your kids? aller: my children are young. i have a 12-year-old, 10-year- old, and 7-year-old. they're all in school. i think that in the suburban areas schools have a chance to be more one-on-one with children. i have lived in a city and suburbs. in the suburbs, the teachers, the schools themselves have a lot more chance to be more in communication with the children, because it is a less population. that's why i choose to live away from the city's. host: but we ask you to respond to this tweet -- caller: no. i think that the population of
people that are using these vouchers and things, like i said in the city there's much more population, so you will see that more in the city areas. in the suburbs there are just as many people looking for a way out, a way to be settled and get a higher education, a way to produce a better life. but you just don't see it as much because it's more widespread. it's not in such a confined area. host: elizabeth, your reaction? guest: i think he made a lot of very important points. just how important stable housing is, so you have that basic platform from which to think about what schools you send your kids to, what jobs are nearby, or services you can connect to.
these things are layered on top of each other. we see a lot of people finding themselves in more opportunity- rich areas, but many are not. they're ending up in low-income areas that may not have as many jobs as neighboring suburbs or access to transit. it may be that they're looking for safer communities, better schools for their kids, but they have been limited in the other kinds of opportunities that and put them in a more stable economic footing. when we talk about suburbs, we tend to think of one kind of place, with suburbs are perverse. the experience of property in these communities and the resources they can bring to bear on these challenges vary. where you live matters in terms of what access to opportunity
you have. host: we are talking about what the new york times called cul- de-sac property, with elizabeth kneebone, the co-author of a report confronting suburban property in america. inside the report, here are the numbers. where the poor people with, 16.4 million in suburbia. on twitter -- guest: there are definitely structural changes that have helped shape these numbers over time. we mentioned the number of jobs that we see it growing fastest in recent years are ones that pay low wages. these are occupations in the service industry that maybe you're getting a typical wage of $20,000 a year, which would not be enough to keep a family above the poverty line even if you are working full-time. there are structural changes we have seen especially if you look at the shift away from manufacturing in many of our
manufacturing-oriented metro areas. sopa jobs now tend to be lower paying = = so -- so the jobs available now tend to be low- paying. host: now a caller in new york, democrat. caller: i'm calling on everything that's happening. they are saying how it's not the government, but they are not understanding it takes legislators to pass bills because positive things to happen. they have to concentrate better, the legislature to get better solutions to end poverty. to decrease, by creating jobs, that helps african-americans, minorities, low-level people. host: we've got your point. a reminder, you got to turn the tv down when it's your time to talk, otherwise we get feedback
and it's confusing. yourbeth kneebone, reaction? guest: there are recommendations which we have put out in the book at different points the show there are choices that congress and state and local policy makers could make two help pave the way for smarter, more efficient solutions. -- to help. we have a strained budget and cuts are being made in real time to address these issues. if we don't do that in an intentional way, we risk creating the same sorts of problems in the suburbs if we have been dealing with in cities for decades. it should be an urgent call to action to rethink the framework and how we are deploying sources to address party so that we are reaching more people in places with limited resources we have. host: michigan, independent, len. caller: lanie, michigan, about 3 miles south of an arbor, by the university of michigan. host: ok. caller: good morning, gretchen, and c-span, and elizabeth from the brookings institute.
the property conversations that i am listening to are pretty much basically the nation, the united states. ands happening everywhere it is being categorized with single parents or divorced parents or married parents. theave had property since early depression. as your previous caller said, a lot of it has to do with the institutions that are setting up these legislations. more and more, this budget was $60 billion and there are 80 different agencies. within that the agency, how about the american institute seeing what payroll is, the retirement for all of these employees, and how much money is being spent there first
before even gets to the public? i think the legislation needs to shrink the government or to combine things, because it just does not work. it is going down and down. it is like the old poker game at a person's home. the house takes a cut. our government is the cut. every time something is played, the government gets more and more. host: elizabeth kneebone? guest: one of the talent is of having a fragmented system like this, suburbs themselves into be quite fragmented. there are overlaps and inefficiencies that we're missing out on because of the fragmentation. we do see a newer efforts in trying to blend dollars from the federal level on down more flexibly, to use them across
more than one jurisdiction. i think that's a very promising model and the way to move forward, because we see cost savings with the dollars stretched further to help more places and have better outcomes at the end of the process. these steps we can take in the short term and long term to reduce the kind of fragmentation that would help make these resources stretched further. host: the cul-de-sac property headline that the new york times used, they put it on a piece written by you, a co- author of this report, on may 20, 2013, if you are interested in reading what the elizabeth kneebone put together, based on this report from brookings. next, maryland, independent caller charlene. caller: good morning. i am a suburban unemployed single mother. i was married and am now divorced with two kids, 12 and 14. i have a college degree.
i put myself through school. in the 16.4 million people. i am a suburban mom living in bowie, maryland. i believe the work force investment act requires states to give training to unemployed people. that is what i'm doing. i lost my job in december. unemployment office and got my unemployment checks, food stamps, had to go through the system. then i decided i would take time while searching for jobs to try to get some better skill sets to make me more able to get a higher-paying job. i may be a little different than some other unemployed people in that i have a college degree, but anyone who goes to their unemployment office can get training in their state, in state. that training can then make them more eligible to get a
higher-paying job. so there are things currently in place that enable people to change their socio-economic status. host: elizabeth kneebone? guest: i think those sorts of programs are incredibly important, and exactly the kind of things we're talking about in terms of allowing people to get the training and access to the type of opportunities that would help them better their family situation, their own economic standing. the challenge we see in suburban communities is we have a diverse array of places. the services may not be as readily accessible or available and may require much greater distances in terms of traveling to get to what is available. we also find residents have some barriers in terms of even knowing what's out there and available to help them. overcoming the informational and distance carriers are important in the suburban context. host: inside this book, you can find the highest and lowest suburban property rates based on 2010 numbers. the highest suburban property rate is el paso, texas.
chris in louisiana in jonesboro, independence. caller: i just wanted to say the middle class has been eroding pretty good for many decades, as your guest noted. it is also important to notice that at the same time it the upper 1% at or upper 5% of the top income earners have grown their wealth manyfold over. so i believe this has been going on for a long time. the end game is to strangle the middle-class, to make all of us more dependent on big brother. host: and this -- anything you have heard from the caller? guest: it underscores we have
seen rising inequality and that creates challenges in terms of having a robust middle-class. that's helpful for -- what is helpful for those residents to create a more stable situation did this is a shift where we have seen a decline in middle- class households. it is something we should be concerned with and are looking for ways to reverse it, because it is healthier overall. host: on twitter at -- guest: again, when we see growth in the poor population the metro areas, a lot of it has to do with the regional and its health and how it is structured can affect these trends over time in the long term, as we saw with the
two recessions in the last decade and with the economic structural changes over many years. but it's also in terms of where people are living, things that can shape that are where the jobs are moving within the region, what kind of jobs are available in these communities, and where affordable housing is, and where people can afford to live in these regions, and looking more broadly at population trends in these areas. host: what kind of jobs are there in the suburbs? guest: many of our jobs in these regions, the talk of them are in suburban communities. any range of kinds of employment. certain industries are even more suburbanized than others. things like construction or retail and services, which are lower paying jobs often. we also see manufacturing is becoming more suburban paris that was an industry hit hard
over the last decade with job losses. our economy is increasingly suburban, but lower income jobs are even more suburbanized. host: dale in vermont, a democrat. -- gayle. caller: i'm calling from piedmont appeal year, vermont. i am married. my husband and i both have degrees in higher education. myself in social services and he is an attorney. he left yesterday for chicago to try to find work. we moved to vermont from milwaukee, and wisconsin. i lived in the university area and the violence and drugs are very evident. i have three daughters and did not want them to have to experience that. being here eight years has been great for them. they're both musicians and both have scholarships to university. i have one daughter back in milwaukee at university.
the problem here is that, you mentioned transit, there is none. eastoreland peel you -- montpelier is essentially rural. the problem is there are either very high paying jobs or very low-paying jobs here. i have been told many times that i am overqualified, so i cannot get even a low-paying job. i'm overqualified, too much education. host: is that a trend you have studied? guest: we have definitely seen the transit issue. this is such a critical challenge for so many families living in suburban communities, particularly families who cannot afford a car or a reliable car that can help them
get to where the job opportunities are in the region. in terms of the skills mismatch, that's a challenge that several communities are facing and makes it all the more important when we think about job attraction strategies or retention strategies within regions, how diversified economy that these regions are building, and what are the training options available for workers who now find themselves in that gap, and education and skills but perhaps need additional training connect to the top opportunities that are there, in addition to the transit that might help them access to jobs. host: on twitter -- guest: the definition of poverty is a baseline question and it's a fair question in terms of how to define this. as we have seen, the census bureau has created a supplemental property measure which is much more nuanced than the one we are using, the base line you're using. it addresses things like differences in the cost of living.
$22,000 for family of four, if you and the suburbs of connecticut or the bay area or new york city, that's a very different standard of living than someplace where the cost of living is lower. we do have the supplemental measure that has been developed, which takes into account differences in cost of living and taxes, benefits people may be receiving that helps them that are not currently reflected in this federal property measure, the traditional measure. the problem is it is not available for small area places. so it's difficult to get a more nuanced stuff and it's only been around a few years, so it does not give us a long look. any measure where you are just on the line, there are drawbacks. this at least gives us a standard benchmarks to see how communities have been fearing for decades. host: and this -- guest: wage levels are definitely an issue.
a number of jobs are being created that pay low wages that even if you are working full time would not be enough to lift you above the poverty line. this can come back to and human capital issued and the ability to have jobs that we are attracting different regions because we have a qualified and dedicated worker base that gets better match is between skills and jobs that pay more over the long term. host: westchester cross appellan -- from westchester, pennsylvania, bill. caller: i am a native washingtonian and have watched the city gentrify over the last 25 years. and out lighter in the statistics might be the fact that higher income people have moved to the inner city. i'm speaking of washington, d.c. that is moving out a lot of the low-income people. the a high income people by the houses, renovate them, the property value skyrockets. they also expect the police to
clean up the neighborhoods. in the d.c. area, a lot of the folks that used to be in the city have moved out, a lot of the poor folks. that might be an outsider in the statistics as far as what is driving those statistics. host: elizabeth kneebone? guest: we see in certain markets the redevelopment of urban neighborhoods, the rising house prices can create a push factor that some low-income residents living in the city are now looking further out for more available and affordable options. it's not the case in every region. in a place like d.c., new york, san francisco, where the housing market are tight, like that is an element at play. growthe rapid pace of and magnitude of growth we have seen and the ship we have experienced across these major regions, the driving factor,
although it's one elements at play. host: 80 in trenton, new jersey, independent. caller: hi, thanks for taking my call. what it comes down to a, a property, there's only one real way to get rid of property and that is jobs. living in trenton, i am 50 years old and i have seen this area change 100% over the past 30 years. all manufacturing jobs in this area are gone. i hear people talk about higher education. that's fine for most, but there's a lot of people out there that they are just not college material. they are better for manufacturing jobs or things like that. you talk about crime and other things. people are working, their hands are busy, so they don't have time to get involved with crime
and drugs. it's always going to be there. we will never get rid of it. eightple are working hours a day, it would keep them off the streets and potentially out of trouble. not only that. it is so much better for family cohesion. most divorces occur over financial problems. if daddy does not have a job and has three kids and cannot support them, a lot of times it throws up his hands and runs away. the holding centers around jobs. i see across the bottom of your screen occasionally that coming up is a talk about the chinese hacking on u.s. military secrets or whatever. people don't realize -- i look at it like lobsters. the american public, if you put a lobster in a cold pot and slowly turn up the heat, it will close every time. if you put them in a hot spot, they will jump out. people don't realize they're being slow cooked. all the jobs in this country are moving out and not coming
back. host: let's take that last statement, eddie. are the jobs going overseas? guest: that goes back to the structural changes we have been talking about, globalization and the decline in manufacturing, that it is a challenge for regions as they see jobs that pay well go away. ones that are coming back are paying less. raises challenges for how to create the kind of connections to people and jobs that give them a path out of poverty. i think we do see promising signs in terms of the rise of high school manufacturing. a caller is right. these are jobs their community colleges could play a role. or certifications where it's not necessarily a four year degree that you could get financial security for your
family. as economies transition and address the structural changes, how can we create those kind of connections to a more productive sectors that can help middle and low wage families. host: if you are interested in this topic, we will cover it more, an event sponsored by the national archives in day-lewis with a panel of local historians to discuss poverty in america. go to c-span.org for more details. elizabeth kneebone, co-author of "confronting suburban property in america". elizabeth kneebone, a fellow at the brookings institute. thank you for being with us. >> thank you for having me. >> tomorrow we look at yahoo! news. olivier knox looks at their coverage, then chris moody on the latest congretional
stories. -- congressional stories. then the obama administrations final three and a half years. "washington journal" is live at 7:00 eastern on c-span. we show you a conversation with raymond kelly on the 16 terrorist attacks they've stopped since 9/11. >> we are a target-rich environment, where large numbers of people come together. concerned about what happened in boston, and we have this -- these radicalized young men trying to attack in the city, and most recently two people were arrested in miami,
scouting out targets in new york city. they were arrested this year. we had a man who was arrested for -- and he was convicted, for attempting to blow up the federal reserve bank. he thought he was that netting 1,000 pounds -- he was just convicted in february. stream of constant individuals, trying to come here and kill us. what do you worry about? we worry about whole spectrum. we have to worry about a nuclear event in new york. we have work with the federal with 150t, a program other jurisdictions in the area that we signed off with, to provide the radiological
detection around new york city. that wet able to say are worried about that -- there are many threats that are out there, we don't see any diminishment of this threat. this is relatively constant and it has not changed after 9/11. part of as conversation held earlier this month. you can see the entire event ahead o'clock eastern on c- span,. booksis week on c-span 2, on america's military. the book, educating america's military. and a former marine discusses his platoon in iraq. then they panicles -- a panel discussion on the challenges
facing veterans returning from combat. >> the public's fascination with frances cleveland -- she was a real fashion icon. they emulated her hairstyle and clothing. everything that she had ended. this is a dress from the second administration, the most prized piece of all because this is the inaugural route -- down, and it stayed in her family and became the family wedding dress. this was used by her granddaughters. every day -- she was very stylish and a lot of these look like something that you would wear now. --s is a wonderful jacket with beautiful velvet -- this is a more even inappropriate piece.
there would have been a matching skirt. and this sequence -- is slightly more ornate. this would have a matching collar. with a can wear this shirt waist and skirt. >> our conversation on frances cleveland is now available on our web site. tune in monday for the next program on caroline harrison. now, today's white house briefing with secretary jay carney. the justice department subpoena of fox news reporters and reports that a u.s. drowned killed a tell -- grdrone a taliban leaders. this is about one hour.
>> hello, everyone. good afternoon. before i take your questions i want to say that the president will be joined by college students at the white house for an event where he will call on congress to stop interest rates from dublin on july 1. this guarantees a low rate in july. democrats in the house and senate have put forth other procedures to achieve that goal. proposal, unfortunately, fails to lock in low rates for students and also eliminates the safeguard to provide middle- class families with lower interest rates for student loans, and raises the rates of students for deficit reduction instead of closing loopholes and tax breaks for the well- connected. the president will call on congress to pass a solution that keeps college affordable, and he
looks forward to working with them in the days ahead to get there. with that, the associated press. >> last week the president talked about greater transparency in the drone program. aboutu confirm reports drawn attacks. and the death of a pakistan leader -- a taliban leaders in pakistan. fore are not in position the staff -- and of those reports were true -- it is worth would that his demise -- have the taliban and pakistan -- but would lose their second in command of the chief strategist. attacks inn part in pakistan and attacks against pakistan and civilians. he is wanted in connection with
the murder of 11 american citizens in 2009 at the fort operating base in afghanistan. to confirm position these reports, it is important -- it is important note to this individual is. am not in't have -- i the position to confirm this for you. i am not in the position to discuss operational matters. it is important on this -- with regard to this individual to know a little bit about his background. >> will you, in the future -- will you have knowledge to be releasing this information? >> i think is important to note that part of the transparency -- the president's speech spoke about the policy standards and
how we seek direct action. those standards are there for the american public to see. this does not mean that we would be able to discuss the details of every counterterrorism operation, but this does mean that this is standard for every american to review. let me also say that to the extent that a question would be asking about the policy, generally, i would defer you to the president's speech where he says, we must support our troops until the transition is complete at the end of 2014. we will continue to take strikes against high-value targets and also forces supporting a tax on coalition forces. by the end of the year we will no longer have the need for this protection and the progress we will have made it will reduce the need for a strike.
i think that this is important to look at what the president said with an context -- of the afghan war theater operations. there were reports today of the rest and the opposition. in syria and the expatriate's -- does this raise questions about your support for those opposition leaders, and about any prospects for a conference that would be successful? >> first, i would say that this is not surprising that there would be disagreements within the opposition. there is a unifying principle within the opposition, and the future of syria cannot include regime, and we'll horror trying to implement the
geneva -- we would share the conference, secretary john kerry has the meeting with other leaders of the opposition to lay the groundwork. we have been working with the opposition, together with our partners, to help them come together and unify them, around core principles. we believe it is important for the process, towards the genevantation of the communicate continues, and the political solution that we seek is -- is the right path to bring about a cessation of the terrible violence there. and the beginning of an implementation of a post-assad future. >> you said that when the president meets with president
ping next week, cyber-security is a major agenda. in the face of what we read hacking of u.s. companies, does the president bring any discussions to those issues, sections that would be imposed on companies indulging in hacking? this is hisorrect, chinese counterpart and there is the relationship that we have -- there will be wide ranging discussions on u.s.-china relations and economic and military cooperations.
will deal with for global challenges. also -- the topic of conversation of the north korea, stability in asia. the bilateral military ties and climate change, cyber security. we have been clear in our concern about cyber security, and the fact that there had been intrusions' emanating from china, as you know, the president's national security adviser just returned from a trip to china where he had discussions with chinese officials with all levels. and from the highest levels -- representing a variety of changes in the chinese government. he raised our concerns on this matter, and made it clear that the united states will do all it
the criticalct infrastructure, and private sector property. as he noted earlier this year, we're trying to investigate this with chinese issues and we're trying to form a working group on those designs, with long- term changes in behavior to stop -- threat of trade secrets but -- stop the theft of trade and -- we are pressing forward with congress on this. there are intrusions on the
u.s. military -- does this undermine other operations? have a broad and complex relationship with china, the two largest economies in the world and we engage with the chinese with thessues, and this will be an important topic on what will be a broad conversation. on ther is a report pentagon, with the -- >> i have commented repeatedly that every option remains on the table when it comes to our there is ards asia,
possibility of a no-fly zone and and it is not accurate to suggest -- and it is not accurate to suggest that this option would be in development. that --made it clear all options be available to him, there is the suggestion of the lawmakers on capitol hill and others on this particular option, it does not seem particularly newsworthy. >> a letter was sent to eric holder about his testimony may thewhere he said -- disclosure of material is not something i have ever been involved with.
the justice department acknowledged that attorney general eric holder wanted the private emails of james rosen. is it the administration's belief -- >> he testified truthfully and the attorney general talked about prosecutions. about the case in question, he completed with no other charges contemplated. i would point to the large -- thetion about prosecution. >> there is the crop -- a report that says no prosecution was
taken on the high-standing reports. this is inaccurate. hethe president was asked if had confidence in the attorney general. as for syria and the no-fly zone, there was talk that russia may provide the anti-aircraft weaponry to the syrian government. move to a potential provide some kind of deterrent? >> there are questions about the, on air force one, continued supply of weaponry to the syrians. believe that this is unhelpful, attributed to the reduction ofth the
the violence that is here -- with a tyrannical regime like provided regime being with weapons is not helpful. >> the error colder testimony, what he said on may 15 was with regard to prosecution -- of fornalism, >> i am looking any evidence that there has been any suggestion to the contrary to what i have seen in published reports is that this case in question, as i understand it on publicly available information, is completed -- no further action is contemplated. so you have hypothetical silicon prairie, they are one thing, but clearly with the attorney general said is accurate. >> this is not hypothetical, what they said is at the very
orst, rosen was an evader co-conspirator. i don't know how you would feel if you had your name -- >> let me just say. be careful not to conflate fax with statements made by members of congress about what they want to be true. the president -- you are talking about this in relation to the congressman and what he has said. was just a couple of things. i can only comment on the report and -- there have been some comprehensive reports on this. from thehat you heard president that his general -- nonspecific any case is about actions that may have a chilling effect on the ability of journalists to do
their jobs, and for that reason, he has asked the attorney general to meet with media organizations and he has asked them to review policies and procedures that govern the way that the justice department approaches these issues, to report back to him on that review. i think it is important to allow the process to be carried out. -- what to note that they made clear rock -- last week, about the balance and the proposition that journalists need to be able to operate and do their job. >> on the national security search, the president talked about greater transparency, over,ting the transfer
for greater transparency. we are now in the middle -- where they are talking about these issues that exist, and here you are giving us the justification in pakistan without confirming this -- extraordinary amount of information at the present provided in a lengthy speech -- this reflects his standing on these issues but does not mean that we will discuss specific counter-terrorism operations. >> will this change over time? >> i think that you have to look at what the president said last week.
with direct targeting, and also weerstand that as he said -- have troops in harm's way. we have to take actions to protect those troops, and part we are drawing- down the presence there, and ending that war by the end of next year. with regards to the troops that we have present right now. thes important to note that guidelines that he talked reflects hisk this commitment to transparency and and it does not
mean that when you -- is a for counter-s terrorism operations. >> is there any justification -- >> i cannot confirm reports that this individual is dead, but i can say that we learned about him, and what the world knows about them. i would say that his demise would deprive them -- would deprive them of the second in command, someone who participated in the attacks -- >> and his activities? >> we have this for a reason. i can tell you that he -- this individual -- >> i can tell you that as i just said, in the afghan war
theater, the transition is complete at the end of 2014. >> what is the president's appraisal of present -- of john mccain visiting the syrian rebels. is this welcome? >> are you asking if we were aware? we were aware of this trip, and we look forward to the president discussing with john mccain, his i don't have a schedule of that for you but he meets with john mccain with regularity -- but i don't know that they have spoken yet since the credit -- since the senator was in syria. >> i mentioned to this opportunity may be stronger? does this administration believe that the rebels are losing
ground, winning, more problematic? what is the feeling on the on the ground effort to unseat the assad regime? >> i would say that he remains his vulnerable position, control over his country is extremely reduced because of the strength of the opposition. ebbs and obviously flows in something like this and we saw the role plate -- the role played by iran, and hezbollah. lotave noted that this is a about their regime, with the friends that they have in the neighborhood and in the world. we are committed with our allies to a process that brings an end to this conflict, allowing the
syrian people to determine their own future. they have determined that their future cannot include the aside regime in power. i think that this is evident -- there remains a great amount of violence in syria and a great loss of life and i am not able to give daily or weekly battlefield assessments, but what i can say is that we are supported -- we are committed to support for the syrian people, and the syrian opposition through the direct assistance that we have provided and we will continue to provide. to we're committed reevaluating the options that are available to the president, further actions in syria. we evaluate those options based on assessments of whether or not implementing those options would bring us closer to the
policy objective, which is the peaceful transition within syria that the syrian people seek and our partners and allies are seeking. >> was your position technically accurate, -- >> i would refer you to the justice department's for further details about what specifically the attorney general was saying. i think based on published reports, it is my understanding that this case is complete, and no further actions will be taken -- based on my reading of published reports. >> but the question is, is there anything in the world that you are personally responsible for? >> i am not sure what the attorney general said about his review -- his view of whether or not prosecution was an issue, i
would simply point to what the attorney general said, based on public reports i have seen, there is no conflict. with part ofup -- this administration, are you satisfied with the response people have had, about matters of congressional interest? the matter of the answer is yes. >> so you have ruled out that he was going to prosecute them and on the chance of a potential prosecution, this is not something i have been involved with. was he not telling the truth on that? was involved in what? >> the search warrant. he was not -- as subpoenanflating with prosecution.
thisnk that -- and again was not what the attorney general said -- with the technical accuracy that you are holding onto. and based on what i have seen in published reports i don't see the conflict. but i would refer you to the jet -- to the justice department. >> this is pretty good, housing is doing great. i don't have a question. is very good, the stock market is doing great. what is your assessment of the economy right now? some people say that there is a bubble and this is getting too good. notrs say that this is great yet and no one is feeling this -- >> we believe that the economy is continuing to recover and strengthen.
of the worstath recession, the indicators that you mentioned, demonstrating that there -- that the recovery is continuing. welcome,articularly with a blow to the house of market. that was caused by the financial crisis and the implosion of the housing bubble. do,ave much more work to precisely for the reasons you mentioned. there are still too many people who have not found work. huge are still too many unmet needs when it comes to rebuilding our infrastructure. and this is essential that democrats and republicans come together to take action on these economic items that have enjoyed
bipartisan support and would provide the kind of direct infusion into the economy and job creation into the economy and the long-term benefits of infrastructure development that would help our economy thrive in the future. we see too many instances that demonstrate the fact that our infrastructure is in need of further investment. for thesteps to invest long-term economic future. we areing sure that investing in areas of the economy that will produce the jobs of the future. and as to become energy independent, we are not treating one form of the importation of energy for another, to create the kind of energy -- with jobs in the united states that will
be more energy-efficient in the future. the news is welcome. this is an end it -- is an indication of the strength of the economy and the american people and the fact that some very tough but correct policy decisions were made in 2009 and put us on, 2012 to the path to economic recovery but we are not there yet and we are not where we need to be, we have to keep at it. you have heard the president and others say that the american people are principally focused on these issues. they expect their leaders in washington to be focused on these issues. making the middle-class more secure. making it more possible for middle-class kids and kids' of families striving to get into the middle class to go to college to get the education
that they need. the president is focusing on those issues and hopes to continue to work with congress to get things done to build on the progress we have made. >> how does it -- the sequester fit into this? you said that this would hurt the economy but now -- you want to of knowledge that the economy is doing pretty well. even though the eight sequester has now had time to kick in. >> there is no question and you don't take our word for it, the assessments of outside economists -- that the sequester will cost jobs. three-quarters of 1 million jobs according to -- this will cost as economic growth. as a percentage of economic growth. and while the economy is work -- is recovering and doing better, it could be recovering
more and doing better if we were not engaged in the process of inflicting wounds on the economy. and that is what washington tends to do. the embrace of the sequester is a perfect example of -- and afflicting a wound to the economy when we should be reducing our deficit in an irresponsible way, and investing in the economy to help it grow faster. even greater than we have experienced so far. >> the present is traveling to chicago this afternoon, engaging in the political process -- and we have seen news reports on michelle bachman saying she won't seek a 5th term. >> i came to the briefing room and i can tell you that this subject it not come up.
so i don't have a response from the president, i believe that we all wish her well, in her future endeavors. we just heard from a short time ago from the commanding general in southwest afghanistan. given the comment you made earlier, with some of the questions about the fact that when we refer specifically to the afghan the order that by the end of 2014 there will be sufficient gains there. todaynew statements saying that the taliban will not be fully defeated, thus that affect the -- reflect the president's position on that? >> it allows me to remind everyone what the president's
policy in afghanistan is. the objective for going into afghanistan, which had been essentially lost by the time the president took office, was to go after those who attacked the united states on september 11, 2001. the president made clear through his policy review that we need to refocus attention on that thelict and refocus on goals that we had set for ourselves and needed to be clear. mantle, andthis ultimately defeat al qaeda, to provide assistance to and create a breathing room for the afghan government to allow the process whereby we could transition security responsibility gradually to afghan forces, and to ensure that through doing that, we made it impossible for
afghanistan to again become a haven for al qaeda and like- minded extremists who had the destruction of the united states and americans as an objective. it is not, and that would not -- that was made clear in the president's policy review and the statement of his policy, the objective to defeat the taliban. reconciliation is part of the process in afghanistan, the long-term process of bringing about a peaceful resolution to the conflict. if the chevelle cut is a very the long-ctive, but term process for afghanistan, for peaceful resolution of this conflict, clearly has to include reconciliation. for those members of the taliban who fight u.s. troops forces,fight afghan they are clearly part of this conflict, and we are engaged
with them, but in the long term, the objective is to defeat al qaeda and to provide the training and assistance necessary to afghan forces so that they can take control of the security of their country. >> in regard to the attorney general and his efforts to reach out to these organizations, i believe it is supposed to happen at some point this week. is that done with any involvement from the white house or from any pressure or encouragement from the president? >> i think the president made clear last week that he wanted this to happen and he wanted a review of these policies and procedures from the attorney general. we think is a constructive and useful engagement, because the president is very focused on and concerned about finding the necessary balance between the need to protect our key national security secrets on the one hand, and making sure that
journalists are allowed to freely pursue investigative journalism and do their jobs. i think you have seen that in what the president said last week, you have seen it in his continued support for a media shield law, which -- for which there is renewed support in the commandnd that we center schumer and senator graham and the others who are pushing on reintroducing a media essentiallyhat assault or the bill that the president and the senate negotiated back in 2009. we would very much like to see action on that in the u.s. senate. mr. nichols. >> as the president believed the relationship with congress is fixable or does he think things have reached the point where
confidence and between the two has broken down, and is that largely the fault of the republicans? i think that the president believes the attorney-general is doing a good job and the president has confidence in the attorney general. there are a variety of matters that fall under the umbrella of the question. the president is committed and has made clear to every member of his cabinet and every member of his team that we cooperate with legitimate congressional and will continue to be the case. it is also true that depending on the issues that there are
some time attempt to politicize matters that in the president's view should not be politicized but should be focused on by both parties when there is a problem that needs to be fixed. that is the president's focus. >> the president is going to chicago to do some fund raising. -- is it aabout when good use of the president's time to be in chicago and campaigning and raising money or should he be trying to build a congressional coalition for what he is hoping to accomplish? >> i think his time is devoted overwhelmingly to the former, as i think in the look of his schedule demonstrates. the fact that the president has taken time to support the dnc or , if you look at what
this president is focused on and the great majority of his time dedicated to it is the business of ensuring that we have the national security policies in place that keep this country safe, keep american safe, and that we are pursuing an agenda that helps the economy grow, helps the middle class feel more secure and helps those who aspire to the middle class to attain that status. those are his primary objectives and in recent weeks, as you know, he has focused on a number of legislative objectives including comprehensive reform. there has been marked progress on that particular issue. there has been some progress on other issues and we will continue to engage these
projects on the president's agenda. nutrition officials are , theng with latinos president did not drop in on that progress at all believe he has. you are correct that the one else will convene our is convening the nation's top hispanic business leaders across the country today for the first ever hispanic business leaders forum. the event was held in conjunction with the chamber commerce and will focus on jobs in the economy. from a range of industries, many from fortune 500 firms, a top professional the next generation of high-growth firms. >> can you help me understand the links between the
president's push for immigration reform? [indiscernible] >> the focus of the meeting today is on economic growth and job creation. i am sure that other topics might be raised but that is the focus of the meeting today. in includes the treasury secretary, the head of the domestic policy council, u.s. chief technology officer, and valerie jarrett, senior advisor to the president. she is also the assistant to the president for public engagement. the folks at the meeting that took this was convened to discuss job creation and economic growth. >> i know will be wide-ranging
but i am trying to understand menbalance between the two to bond with each other and get to know each other. the chinese leader did the same to the u.s. for last week by coming down against north korea. is like the elephant in the room, the cyber thing. the think it is more of dealing with tensions had on automating or let's try to figure out what we can work on together. the approaches that we deal with those areas of cooperation and competition head-on. we are very clear with the chinese about issues of disagreement, and very clear about issues where we see room for greater cooperation and coordination. the chinese just
completed a leadership transition and of course the president not that long ago realized -- that it was a good time for the two leaders to get together. the issues that you talk about have been present in the discussions between leaders of both countries for some time now i know that will continue to be. this is a relationship that has elements of significant and important cooperation as well as competition. both withdirectly on the chinese, and we think that is the best approach, as a way cooperationevelop in our relationship, whether it is military to military cooperation or regional, global, economic issues or climate issues. it is the way to deal with disagreements or areas of competition, and that is the
approach we have taken. on the matter of cybersecurity, -- in the interest in pursuing a dialogue on these matters. the president is very clear about the priority he places on cyber security for all the reasons i mentioned earlier. the administration in the search for credible facts about [indiscernible] >> would continue to work with our partners and allies as well as the opposition, in putting together and gathering evidence , fact that corroborate the information that we have and build on it. theontinue to press for assad regime to allow the u.n. investigators into the country to look into this matter.
and we talk about without getting into specifics about the process, the answer is we do have some ability and we work with our partners and allies and most importantly the opposition on this matter, but i can. youtube what we said about the evidence that we had gathered and the intelligence assessments that were available at the time. i have no new announcements to make on that, but we are continuing to pursue this matter as one we consider to be very serious and important. you talk about the balance between national security and the need for the press to do it stop. is it the standard that a journalist is prosecuted
[indiscernible] things should be said about this. first, on a specific case, beyond the public reports, i cannot really offer my opinions about it. i would. you do what the president said last week. i would point you to some of the president did some of the published reports about what you are raising, but i would also note that the president has asked for the attorney general to review the procedures and policies in place that govern the approach to these matters when journalists are involved, and as they tend to be, in investigations o'clock illegal leaking of classified information. i think you heard from the president his views on this and concerns about it. you have heard from me about my views, both as a spokesman
somebody with a background in journalism. throughout this, it is important not to lose sight of the fact that we are talking about classified information, the leaking of which is a crime. unless, as i said one day last week or the week before, there was a suggestion that we should simply make all information available to everybody, including al qaeda and everyone around the world and eliminate that and make it freely thelable and deal with national security consequences. there has to be some process in place that allows for the protection of classified information that allows for there to be consequences if individuals who have sworn to keep those secrets rectal wall by not giving them.
-- to keep those secrets by not giving them. question, good president obama was looking forward to meeting with early after the chinese transition, the leadership transition there the president in his new capacity to discuss the agenda, and the president had plans to travel and california emerged as a good location. california is closer to asia, obviously, and california became a useful place and a good place to have this meeting. sunnylands,ting at
which is a private location that has hosted president senate- passed that will allow both presidents and a small group of advisers to have the kind of in- depth discussions that i know president obama is looking forward to. >> [indiscernible] >> we have not worked out all the details of the scheduled yet. british and french are looking at evidence of chemical weapons. there is no reason to believe that the assad regime will [indiscernible] the possibility that we would never know if the red line was crossed or not? >> obviously including the english, the british and french on this issue, and importantly, the opposition on this issue, on the effort to gather evidence
about the potential use of chemical weapons or to build on the evidence that we have already gathered. presidentu are the and others say it is very important that we be very sure and clear about the facts that and that those facts are corroborated and reviewable. if the cases to be made for policy response that we ought to be a will to make a very strong , and at the time we were discussing this, it was noted thatthere is some history i think demonstrates the need to be absolutely sure of your back, and absolutely sure that you have the ability to put together a series of facts that can be corroborated and reviewed , if you are wrong
to contemplate a policy response to crossing the red line. we all are in that process, working with our allies. there's a concerted effort and a number of areas to try to gain ever made about this, possibly chemical weapons used, to document and proved it, and then to move forward once the process is completed. >> you have said repeatedly d to go.a now he will remain until the 2014 elections and may run again. that you are telling me assad has made clear that he intends to cling to power, i don't think that is news. i think we clearly disagree and more importantly, the syrian people, allies of the syrian opposition people around the region and the world to disagree
that assadoposition has a future as the leader of syria. as arocess that talk about result in a post-assad syria. we talk about the composition of the group of participants in those discussions and that would obviously be something that everyone has to agree to, including the opposition, but the end result has to be a political transition that does not include bashar al-assad in power at the end. bringingterested in about the transition as soon as possible. that is why we have worked on establishing an reinvigorating these process and setting up a conference in june and we are going to press to bring this about as quickly as possible,
mindful of the many challenges that are out there at the conclusion of this process. the president welcomes governor chafee to the party. he has been a longtime supporter of president obama and not as a party matter but as a supporter of the president and his policy, but i don't have any other response beyond that. >> i have a question on russia. i understand you could not talk about the contents of the document but the general reaction is it is moving the dialogue forward. >> i will have to take your
question. i am not aware of a document, but i could say that obviously we communicate with the russian leadership all the time, and the president has had several conversations with president putin. >> the russian president's national security adviser recently [indiscernible] >> i just don't have any information about those communications for you. i can take the question, but my guess is we are not going to discuss those kind of communications. am listening to all this and basically a general question, [indiscernible] to which international laws apply? is international
laws do apply, including laws of human rights, and it is an abomination for a regime to participate in a massacre of tens of thousands of its citizens. that is an abomination. the world sees that, the syrian , and we arein it committed with our allies and the syrian opposition to bringing about a future, are helping bring about a future for syria that is a marked improvement on its present. i don't understand how a lawmaker from a different country can come into a place, into a different country and basically call for a regime change or something like that. what legal basis -- >> is a matter u.s. policy that we believe that assad must not continue to rule syria, that he
has massacred his own people. he has the blood of his own -- longn his hands, ago bosch are telesat -- bass he chose to wage war on his people and we are not apologetic that the policy position calls for a future in syria that does not include a tyrant who has demonstrated his willingness to murder his own people. [indiscernible] i am not even sure what your question is. i get the motivation behind it. we just disagree on our basic view of the situation in syria. thank you all very much. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national
cable satellite corp. 2013] >> we heard jay carney answer fromions about reports pakistan. earlier wreck the pentagon -- here is part of that. >> right now, if you were here you would seek the afghan national security forces, all the pillars of that force, in a fight as they are closing the fight rapidly. they have done quite well. i suspect by tomorrow the taliban will have been defeated and move out to wherever else they go in the future. with that, i will take questions. to follow up on a
couple of the statement you made there, including the last one about by tomorrow. did you mean literally by tomorrow, but taliban will have been defeated and can you expand on that a little bit? could you elaborate on your earlier statements -- i think you are talking about the afghan forces taking responsibility throughout. you said you believe we are at that point. could you explain about where you stand on that? >> certainly, it will fall in with the five that is going on. i do believe the fight will be complete by tomorrow. has been going on since the 25th. us someupport as well
resupply that in logistics they need some work on. they have done this pretty much by themselves. i just met with the general about three hours ago and we discussed what was going on and what he needed. he is not happy for -- not asking for anything other than aerial support to move some personnel around and for some logistical support. i asked him specifically if needed help if needed getting ammunition move forward, and the answer was, quite honestly, no. what he did was move from the south and the north simultaneously to close in on the enemy and then pushed them where her to the west has position commando forces, or to the east where they would go .ack over into kandahar
most of them tried to go to the west, and they are trapped as we speak. >> you can see all of today's pentagon briefings any time at c-span.org. tonight, a conversation with the new york police commissioner raymond kelly. he also talks about what the city is doing to prevent future terrorist attacks. richard kelly spoke earlier this month at the 2013 new york ideas festival. we will have that for you at 8:00 p.m. eastern here on c- span. is book week on c-span2 tv in prime time. former marine donovan campbell, from thea session
william military writers' symposium on veterans returning from combat. now general james amos discusses automatic spending cuts and the challenges he is facing because of them. held earlier today at the brookings institution, this is an hour-and-a-half. >> good morning, everyone. welcome to brookings. colleagues, we would like to welcome you and especially welcome general james amos, the commandant of the u.s. marine corps, to be here today. the format for today is that the general was before 10 or 15 minutes, summarizing some of his spot on some issues that i know our interest to you as well. then he and i will have a conversation here, and then we will turn to the crowd.
we have c-span you are covering and some other tv. if i call on you in the course of that conversation, please be sure to identify yourself, wait for a microphone before doing that, and then we will proceed. general ams is a combat aviator from the great state of idaho where he attended college. he has been in the marine corps for here -- for his entire 35- year career. he is a senior member of that illustrious body, a top adviser to the president in all matters of national security, and of course the marine corps's top planning but jitter and so forth. he has had -- top planning .udgeteer in 2006 when he and general david petraeus teamed up to ride the counterinsurgency manual for the u.s. military. prior to that he had been instrumental in his role as a
war fighter in the early stages of the invasion of iraq. prior to that he had a number jobs deployed around the world, as all marines do, and as we will discuss further today. one of the important priorities is keeping the marine corps global and responsive, which is a big part of the services ethos. although still there were several thousand personnel in afghanistan as we speak. without further ado, we'll ohrid delighted to have you here, the commandant of the marine corps. [applause] >> thanks for the kind remarks. if i had only been in the marine corps for 35 years, i would probably looked a hell of a lot bianca. my wife and i have been married for 42 years, since right after
i joined the marine corps. this is all i have ever known. but thank you for the warm welcome. i have just a couple of bullets here. i will not read my remarks but i have a couple of things i would like to talk about here in opening. is thesked often, what main thing on your mind that keeps you awake at night and that you spend time thinking about? to be honest with you, it is how do you get through this austerity? it is real, it is upon us. all of you in this room have done it, gone back to look at historical downturns after major combat. sometimes it is 30%, sometimes 29%, but from the peak to the bottom of the trough and where it begins to turn back up, that is somewhere around 9-10 years. and it is historical.
i would hope that this time is not the case, but you don't know. -- prepareepare them the marine corps for the future. i look at that historical downturn, and how can we as the senior leadership of the marine corps, and myself as a, not, how corps throughd the that period of austerity? i want to remind everybody that as we gather in here, there are 30,000 marines that are deployed around the world. they are on the marine expeditionary unit, some are out ourhe gulf of aden, doing nation's work. we had marines in the gulf, flying in the gulf, and we have a significant contribution on the ground in afghanistan. turning the world on its axis,
going out to the asian-pacific area, we have zero large amount of marines out there -- we have a large amount of marines out there. we have a marine rifle company down in australia, our nation's first installments for that renewed relationship between the government of australia, there are me, and the u.s. marine corps. so we are optimistic about that. focusing more specifically on afghanistan, even though our nation is weary of war, i am mindful, and i would ask you to be mindful, of what is happening in afghanistan. if you have talked to john allen when he was still the commander, he would say exactly the same thing. if given the opportunity to complete the mission, not just to pull the last force out and live, but to complete that mission that both of those officers, and they know more than any of us who anticipate
success. success is defined by all of us in different ways. the helmets on province which is where your marines are today. there are about 8000 u.k. forces there and two battalions of our georgian brothers. the republic of order, not the state of georgia. we have jordanians and austrians on the ballot thus -- on the ground with us. with us for aen long time for biting a service. in that helmut province, which was one of the most dangerous places in all of afghanistan -- and i go there frequently. i will be there next month. we spent christmas there. i have watched this progress to the point where i can tell you with some level of confidence that things are going particularly well.
we have every reason to be confident that if given the opportunity, we will be allowed to complete the mission and be successful in afghanistan. is it going to be in your mind what success is? probably not. in my mind, the way i define it is we will give the people in province the national security forces and army police and the central government of afghanistan the greatest opportunity for success for the future. the conditions will have been set. it will be up to them to seize those conditions and proceed on. i feel very good about what is happening. we are done with offensive combat operations. we do not write operations orders, we write supporting orders in support of the afghan national army that are there.
we feel good about how it is going along. avenue provincial governor and he is doing a terrific job. we have a courageous corps commander down there. they are doing well. these are tough times we are in right now. it is not a tried statement. i want to remind everybody that i am also a taxpayer. i pay taxes like hopefully all of you in this room. here we are in this unprecedented time where we have the longest war nomination has been in. we have a physical prices -- fiscal crisis that is real and is upon us we are drawn down forces in afghanistan after 12 or 13 years of combat between iraq and afghanistan. we are downsizing the poor so that we can pay your bill while facing frustration, which is the $500 billion bill over the
next 10 years. $487 billionp of that had been passed a year-and- a-half ago in the budget control act. under bob gates, we found another $200 billion worth of bills that we had to pay, and it is called efficiencies. i don't recall the marine corps getting any of those deficiencies. trillion, for.20 the purpose of discussion. that is real money and it will have a real impact. whate give you my sense of the world is likely going to look like over the next two decades. i see much of what we are going through right now -- at don't away.y of it going i do not see major theatre war over the next two decades.
call it difficult, challenging, him in intensive -- not necessarily technology intensive, but human intensive kind of conflicts and challenges over the next two decades. i often call them the nasty little things that happened around the world or in the international community, not just the united states of america, has a responsibility to around the world. global responsibilities. to what degree is yet to be seen. i sense that the world is not getting any nicer. and don't see any education over the next two decades that things are going to settle down -- any indication that things are going to settle down and become peaceful. newspapers,major you can see it on your daily paper. everything on what is happening in syria, you see it on the nightly news and in the morning
news. we are not sure how it will play out. is not clear precisely what is going to happen in syria, and yet the whole world is focused on it. what about hezbollah? there was something in the paper about a just this morning. threats from syrian fighters. you better quit supporting the regime. challenging, our relationship with iran. 851ok at iraq, having lost marines killed in action in iraq. we have an investment. in addition to the monetary andstments and the years the sweat and toil, there is also our most precious commodity, which is the currency which is our young men and women. so i have an investment in
iraq, and i have lived a very close attention to it. you watched it last night on the news, and solid again this morning. there is no indication that that area is going to settle down. its axisglow began on to a month and a half ago with the 30-year-old boy leader of north korea -- turned the world on its axis. probably the oldest person in this room. i distinctly remember nikita khrushchev in the 1960's taking his shoe often banging the heel at the united nations. the united nations in new york city threatened thermonuclear war against the united states, we are going to wipe you out. yet just a month and a half ago, he now calls himself the supreme leader of north korea,
he said he will destroy the u.s. with thermonuclear war. i have not heard rhetoric like that since the 1960's. that is just the highlights. there are territorial tensions and lots of things going on around the world. i was in the u.k. last week speaking to command staff and talking with some of my french brothers about mali and what is happening there. a very courageous stance from my perspective on what the french have done. sooner or later, the international community is going to have to address some of these thorny, nasty, tacky little things going on around the world. we may think we are done with them, but they don't necessarily the -- they are not necessarily done with us. let me switch from that and talk a little bit about what we do with this environment. now we have this brought down,
this tension going on inside a coronation. not just the department of defense, it is inside our nation, how we are going to pay our bills, reorient our focus back to the united states. it cannot ignore that world that i just described. you cannot turn your back on it because it is very dangerous. in some cases, depending on the threat and who is involved in it, the international community does not address some of these threats, we may find those threats in washington d.c. we may find them in new york city. we may find them in the major cities all around the world. so somebody has got to do something. there has to be a sense of presence and a sense of engagement. that is why you have a u.s. marine corps and the u.s. navy. that is what we do. it is paid for.
there are still bill felt there and we are still building new pieces of equipment, but are unable -- this is what we do. need an air field. we'll need to step on one of our allies sovereign territory. quite honestly, we sailed around the world and interact with nations and build relationships the cannot be searched in time of conflict. relationships are important to build trust right now. that is what we do. and things become a little bit questionable, we can pull off the coast. there is nothing that sends the same signal as three amphibious ready ships full of 2500 marines. not necessarily doing anything, but everybody understands the seriousness of what could take place. in my experience, it has a
calming effect. so there is an engagement responsibility, that our nation needs to acknowledge. while we are drawing down and we want to come back to the u.s. and reinvest ourselves inside the department of defense and inside our nation, the question for me is, what is that balance between the reality of the world and how you deal with it and how you live in that reality, and then how you pay your bills. how you rebalance, reset your service. my service, probably more than any others, we took our equipment to the war in iraq and most of it we left there. we bought for maintenance facility so we could refurbishing it.
most of the equipment we had in iraq actually found its way over to afghanistan. the equipment coming out of afghanistan now has been in that part of the world for a long time. so the challenges i have right now as a service cheek is the reality of the budget. sequestration is real. ladies and gentlemen, the bill was signed on march 2. i take it as rally. i am not in the nile on sequestration. arael and we are working on plan right now that will pay my bills. congress down the road elects to change this, the american people decide that we need a better way to do business than this sequestration, which i think is a terrible way to do business, but is certainly has an effect. if they change, that is great. but for right now, we have been
working on a plan for about 90 days on how we will pay our bills. and i know precisely how we will do it. the key is for us as a nation now, how much is enough, and how goingo we need to have forward, because we have global responsibilities. we do have responsibilities as a superpower. you could argue with me and say there are other superpowers out there, but this is not a prideful statement. is the the united states most significant superpower overall world. more things right than we do wrong. we work pretty hard to try to provide peace and stability. some of you may argue with that, but i think we do.
is ourissue is, what responsibility as a global nation? just turn to the asia-pacific area. we have five major treaties in the asia-pacific area, and they go back decades. we have responsibilities. nationsargue that many in the asia-pacific area rely on the president of the united states. ignore think we can those responsibilities. as i put in my -- i take my comment from the marine corps hat off and i think about the nation and what is best for the nation. how do we fulfill our role as a global superpower. and then as a the part of the fence, what is our responsibility in that?
more specifically and more tightly focused, what is my responsibility to provide capabilities as the, of the marine corps. with that i think i will stop, and mike and i will jump up here and take some questions. thank you. [applause] >> thank you, general. i would like to pick up with a couple of the scenes that you usually begin with. let's get to the sequestration matter in more detail. i will begin as a for early skeptic might. i raised the issue in terms of .he debate we heard last year secretary panetta and others were saying that sequestration is allowed to happen, this guy's
going to fall. now we are a couple of months into it and this guy does not seem to have fallen. i am not trying to defend sequestration, by the way, but i think a lot of people will wonder why such a hullabaloo is made of this. so much rhetoric was devoted to has happened, and we seem to be doing ok, at least in the short term. can we keep in place and keep the cuts over 10 years as opposed to just suffering through sequestration for a few weeks or months. why did this guy not all? >> it is because it has not taken root yet. i read this in the paper just like all of you do. i would say that is probably a great question. the fact of the matter is that and marineof design
corps to live with it. all those services are doing it. , which was revealed to be when the president decides he is satisfied with the planning we have done. with thathappens, sense of what sequestration will do and is all about, will begin. that will be significant. the fact of the matter is we fy13.n everyone else is on a continuing resolution. it has not taken root yet, but it will. i would predict that it will within the next six months.
how are operations and training regimens changing, starting about now, if i remember -- water people not going to be this summer that they normally would be doing. how worried about that are you? >> i have made a decision that we would take monies out of other accounts for this year and move it to what we call readiness. ofhave taken money out facilities. all the buildings and the barracks that are marines libyan, the -- that are marines live in, places will work in and out, that is one area where i
reached in and touched. i also reached in and touched those areas -- i pulled money out of those units for training. i have gone through and pulled money out just about every town i can to maintain readiness this year for those units that are deployed. they are the highest priority. the end of this summer in august and september which will begin to turn the course over in afghanistan. those units will be at the high state of readiness. i effectively mortgaged near- , to pay for that. here is what the impact will be we rollng changes and into sequestration and a
continuing resolution for next year. i don't think we should turn our back on that. that is the reality of what will probably face for 2014, the continuing resolution. predict as we go into january, a little bit less than , but they combat units infantry and the guys that support them, will be little less than 50% combat ready. the half my forces will be less than ready to deploy to combat. i want to be clear something happens, we are going to go. if something bad happens around the world, we are going to go. that is not the way we train and not the way we like to deploy forces. i am not optimistic that things will change. then the sustainment we have
order this year will roll into next year as compound interest. on your major equipment modernization efforts, that has to be a big concern, too. those who are not always studying the marine corps. you have your amphibious vehicle you like to replace. versionel the previous and you make sure you dealt with that program. you have a few other major programs and a lot of smaller ones. how are all those programs bearing and how did you explain this sequestration both now and into next year? -- iave taken the osprey
probably remember beginning at 2000. we are well beyond that right now. the airplane is doing incredible. that is going well and we anticipate that we have bunnies in that contract for the multiple years. the amphibious combat vehicle which is a replacement for the tractors that we currently have -- it is not a far mall or a john deere. theshley and a previous nicolette's winds to shore, loaded with combat marines inside of it.
our vehicles are little more than 40 years old. andave refurbished those added and a service life extension on them twice. you come of an amphibious ship one of two ways. you either fly off of it or swim off of it in one of these vehicles. that is it. we have some transport connectors but that does not hold all the marines, so we needed. we have been at it for 2.5 years to get that right. i am only going to get one more shot at getting this right, so i take it very, very seriously.
the industry has helped us out with this thing. we will make a decision this fall with regard to the speed and capabilities. what i am looking for right now is just a good forward f-150 kind of vehicle that is reliable and can move our marines and marines are our around. please don't just think this is a vision of a vehicle that is an amphibious assault. to would take 700 ships haiti, it was our amphibious tractors going back and forth. they are a utility fighting vehicle for us. the replacement is doing well.
we will have 16 airplanes next quarter and by the end of the year. only short take off beingertical landings built in the world. you can ask yourself, why do we need something like that? the amphibious ships as carriers. , likere around the world -- like in worldaden can fly of aiden, it off the ship and go out and do the bidding of the nation. harrier die,t the
we would have 11 large deck carriers which would just be helicopter platforms. those programs are funded we will keep those programs a lot. >> thank you. he said something interesting that caught my ear. point you're making the that we needed capabilities for a lot of things. i'd like to examine that first part of your statement and ask of the big wars that you do not think are likely, which do you think we need to the ready for? could you give an example or two of the kind of larger campaigns if any that you think the country and the marines need to
be ready for? >> i'm glad you asked that. i want to make sure that we understand what i said that, i do not anticipate that. the one thing i would remind wrongne that what we get more often that we get right in the past, it is certainly not prophetic any stretch of imagination, but looking at the to reengage itself is probably pretty slim. i do not think for a second that we should ever think it will not happen. we have been fooled before. we came out of world war ii. we thought we were done with it.
we have to be prepared for what we used to call -- we have to be. our nation has to be. the has to be enough capacity ande if something happens, the american people expect that. how much and what does it cost? the people and the president will rightfully expect the military will be repaired. -- prepared. it is not just a force that handles these crises. we have to be prepared to do major war. i have got to tell you, none of us in this room know precisely what will happen with north korea.
that probably was not even on anyone's radar. all of a sudden, it blossomed. one of us knew how it would turn out. should our nation need to, there is an example of where our nation would have to have the capability and capacity to be able to respond. >> i will try to wrap up in a second. i want to tie together some of these different pieces. we have talked about sequestration and modernization. we have talked about major wharton small operations. can you help us understand at what point the budget cuts really makes it in a whole new way fundamentally uncomfortable? ,e are hoping we sequestration you have explained why it is worse than it looks. you have found ways to compensate in the short term. at what point do budget cuts really become crippling to our
ability to handle major wars and small ones? heidi explain that to a skeptical audience? explain that to a skeptical audience? some people will say, why can't you get by with that? what is the real risk? it looks like a pretty good military. can you link a certain size budget cut to a real on the fundamental pressure? >> i do not have a monetary figure for the department of defense. how do we pay the sequestration bill? what does that look like? we have an opportunity to talk about this. we know what that would look like roughly in people and equipment capabilities and
capacity. you have a sense of that. .here is a dollar figure i will tell you what i worry about is this force that am looking at building for to icommodate sequestration -- think that is significant. i have an obligation to do my part and be prepared for the american people on the president. , the force that we are building will go to war and it will come home when the war is over. that is not something that we are used to. my father was used to that.
my wife's father was used to that. they went off to the war in the pacific and four years later, the bus pulled up in alabama and my father-in-law got off. we are used to rotating forces every several months. we will rotate a squadron. we will rotate major headquarters. first thing that is a threshold. the second thing is a force we are building under sequestration. that is significant. ,hat i mean i wanted to dwell to deploy and go on a ship. he goes on aircraft carrier. it is home for 12 months and then they go again. what does that mean?
, most the height of iraq of the ground forces were on at least one to one. you are gone seven months and home seven months. that begins to wear on the force. training and prepping and have tools. -- are home at five months for five months. we were coming out of the war. we had a force that was on one to three ratio. you go for three months and be home for 18 months. the force that we are building in the u.s. marine corps to pay our bills will be one to two.
arefact is, the marines like that because they are a young force only like to deploy. but families will not be too thrilled about it. there's a little bit of danger in that. the issues come back on the home front. it will be go to war and stay. that will beforce a rapidly turnaround force. >> i have got a few more questions, but i will hold myself in check and throw one to you later. front row.e in the please identify yourself and ask a general question. >> thank you for joining us. we have had a talk that has been interesting. mike has been asking you in many ways about the future. you answered about the future
and talked about historic echoes. lookingrested in further into the marine core history. is there a parallel in organizational challenges and identity that you keep in mind as you were dealing with these questions for the future? what are some lessons you have learned? >> i have read the writings of a lot of the previous commandants. seven beside myself are still alive. i have read a lot of what they have written. a general went through some pretty challenging times. trying to figure out what the force threshold would look like.
the trend was to take the marine corps down 160,000. the general end up with a force about 172,000. some commandants have been faced with a budgetary issue. i do not think anything like what we are going through today. to 1946, we as a nation completely emasculated the entire department of defense. we realize we were tired of the war. we fought were on two continents. with our allies, we were successful. had it not turned out that way, ingot be would be sitting
this room and things would have turned out dramatically difference. i look at that and i think of how quickly that turned around. .here was a debate in congress some great general officers in that time. .950, we were ill prepared farent to war in korea from preparedness. it cost us dearly. caught up and figure it out. but it was costly to get their. -- there.
and nonistration leadership in congress is taking the marine corps below is certain level. there's reason for that. ,hen it's a that is the reason there are plenty of others. i look at the challenging times. the look and i say, ok. you have got to get this right. the different opinions about how much is enough and what is right. i do understand that. we are not going to get it exactly right. ast we cannot afford to do a nation is getting exactly wrong. i looked at us coming out of world war ii. take a deep breath. we will work our way through the budget. we will work our way through our efforts.
lose or forget the lessons from that time. >> next question. third row. thank you, general, for your comments. my question is on training and education. over the last decade, cultural language and regional skills have really been emphasized in training and education. the force is looking forward. with budget cuts, how important do see the skill set for potential missions moving forward, especially after rebalancing training and education? >> good question. it is every bit as important in the next two decades based on that environment that i described where it is people intensive kinds of engagement.
sometimes it's training and engagement and sometimes it is actual conflict of various sizes. the lessons that we have learned over the last 10 or 12 years of war were critical to the future. it is language and culture. .uman terrain before that we used to talk about war among the people. relationshipf building and confidence building. is the mostople important part. we cannot afford to lose that. we will not lose that in the marine corps. .ur tools are resident schools i have made it clear that as we go forward, we will not lose the lessons of the counterinsurgency mindset. we did after vietnam. we forgot all about it.
it took a while to relearn. probably doing that better than we have ever done before. but we will lose that because there are plenty of places around the world where there might be a small insurgency. i would argue what is happening in mali is an insurgency. it could be a lethal one. how do you deal with that? there are folk that want to eke out a living. an international community, if we touch those kinds of communities, we have got to be mindful of their culture and the language and their nuances and the things that are important to them. relationship building is critically important.
i have talked to my officers and brigadier generals. i spend a lot of time with them. i talked about enforcing relationships. picku go was sure, you some country, maybe we have the benefit of being there before. perhaps we can even pronounce the name of the. relationships are built their will the thing thing that cost us to be successful and helpful or not. we will not turn it back on that. we never used to include staff noncommissioned officers. we are sending them right now to get education and defense languages. they can do it. >> in the fourth row.
, you are downsizing at the same time congress and the administration wanted to beef up your security detachment. thatre you going to manage manpower on the budget crunch of downsizing? you're still trying to add another 1000+ for the security drop. -- job. when the question first began eight or nine months ago -- hammon embassies -- how many indices armoring that? half around the world. -- how many indices -- embassies
are marines at in the world? half around the world. what can he do? we can do anymore with what we have. we need to put more marines if that is the will of congress. how many more? the number roughly was about 1000 marines. congress went after that. that was included in the language. it is 1001 marines. , we talkedussions about misuse of those units. marine security guards at the
american embassies is about 1 -- senior staff and several lance corporals. they are highly trained. they have security clearances. is to not only protect the immediate counsel or secure thet to classified material that is in there. there are. this not really to get in the vehicle and provide protective service. really toob is not get in the vehicle and provide protective service. that is not permission. how do we do this thing?
we develop training standards and a plan. can you do this? yes. would you like to do this? yes. it is part of who we are. how do you pay for? -- for it? they would be paid for by a line item out of congress. i didn't know it will turn out that way. i want to be clear that this is a mission that i think is important to our nation. i think the marine corps ought to do it. i looked at everybody and said regardless of how this turns out with regards to money, we will do this mission. it will be 192.1.
excuse me. 181. my math is not good. 181.1. we will do it. we are working with the state department right now. that are six embassies will receive marine security guards in the next little bit. we will slowly build that capacity. we built a small force that can be rapidly flown in. that is called the security
unit. we can fly them anywhere in the world. we have that. >> second row. >> good morning, sir. [indiscernible] you don't have to tell us unless you want to. -- have got to develop some i'm wondering at the look at some of the lessons you have learned over the past few years, how do you see the dirty fiber that 22 and how it will change how you work in the pacific in particular?
>> it will likely be in 2015 and 2014. .0 airplanes and 10 crews they have been trained to do the missions. that is the definition of ioc. the squadron itself will be at full 16 planes. we're planning on that happening toward the latter part of 2015. ie concept of operations, think if you take a look at how then tedious ships of late have -- ampibious ships of late have been used -- a stock of late
how they been used -- let's talk of late of how they have been used. this is under the secretary gates era. -- repressed into the gulf pressed into the golf. we still had other issues down in the gulf. needed a craft with precision weapons where you could do percent asked targeting -- precise targeting. the ships became almost surgically capability for the president and the secretary of defense. it has beenime, used in awful lot in that
regard. we have a squadron on the ground and carriers. you remember the terrible .ttack we had last september we lost six airplanes out of that. nevin flying in support of the coalition forces for at some time. -- they have been flying in support of the coalition forces or sometime. if you turn the clock back a little bit, we were not sure what would happen with qaddafi. u.s. were trying to figure out, what is it that we should do? expeditionary us -- expeditionaries. they turned left. when off the coast of libya. libya. off the coast of
what are we getting do no fly zone. no-fly zone reinforcement. we need to get the tankers down from europe so we could tank the aircraft. is a great example of flexibility with the airplanes. when you go back to the iraq we had 72 carriers. .e move them to sure -- shore. i have got pictures of them.
i landed in a helicopter off the highway. what do you need? i need air support. we started landing carriers there. we armed them and refueled them for the attack on baghdad. i expect we will do the same thing for the -- ., to picke question up on this point. -- i want to pick up on this point. you made a solid argument for the value of vertical landing aircraft. wasare only the service such thanks. fields are becoming potentially vulnerable.
>> i will not answer that. [laughter] it is interesting. u.k. sir david richards approach me and said, if we , willd to come back in you be ok with that? the answer is of course, yes. u.k. pilots back into the squad. navy put a u.k. pilot or pilot and each one of the squadrons. -- in each one of the squadrons. marianne it -- they are in it. at a picture the world as a satellite flies over,
take a look at the image of where the runways are versus just000 -- that is runways and not highways or parking lots. .bout 10000 and times as many the places we will probably be operating in, that is important. whether the air force should buy it is important for us. that is what we do. we are more than willing to live hard. we do not need fancy air- conditioning.
we can live off -- we need to operate our equipment off it. i've got hundreds of pictures refueling airplanes and vehicles. off of highways on the way to baghdad. >> thank you. next question. in the back. general, i do not want to get you in trouble. but i'm reading a book right now that is a brookings book. really interesting. he talks about the time he served as secretary. we have something like for additional undersecretaries and 12 additional secretaries in the defense department. made a strong argument for getting rid of the secretaries.
can you talk about the bloat and the pentagon leadership? you guys really are trying to get me in trouble. [laughter] it is recognized that there has been growth within the pentagon. the joint staff and the commanders. it is kind of but we called the fourth estate. the folks that support the services. that is one of the things i'll be half -- that is one of the things that will have to be addressed under sequestration. i can do like my server secretary. i like what he does for the u.s. marine corps. a formal neighbor -- naval
officer himself. he understands this. how much is enough with everything else? as the staff grows, the activities grow. the services have to respond. we have to. we grow. our service headquarters gross in response -- grows in response to the growth of forces. it is a natural tendency. the question we are facing right ?ow is how much is enough of truthto this thing and tell. i could be cyber and airplanes and ships.
whatever that is. how much? fast be some kind of tail. -- there has to be some kind of tail. if you look at the department of , there is tail that will have to go under the magnifying glass. it will have to be scrutinized. what we cannot have is continue to allow growth to happen at the expense of war fighting capabilities. we have a department of defense for one reason and one reason only. it is not to do paperwork and answer questions. we defend the united states of america and defend its interests. that is why we have it. we do not have a for a whole lot of other things.
without telling you but we have i have looked outside and inside his will. >> in the same row. -- inside as well. >> in the same row. >> thank you. i hope my question will be less controversial. -- you mentioned how the post-world war ii brought on how we had to build back up for korea. does the marine corps have a plan for sort of being able to we gety draw up if
another strategic surprise? there is the possibility of it happening earlier. such plants be affected by sequestration? >> thank you. when secretary panetta called me about six months or year he gave up his job, this is when the budget control act was signed and sequestration was as we do this and begin to reshape the force, there are several things we need to keep in mind. we need to build a taxable force. we have to build -- we have to build a flexible force.
as you reshape the force, you have to build in reversibility. he also said, i don't want to build a larger force. it is probably of worth talking more. he said reversibility is a key factor. what does that mean? a ship mate is worried about the industrial base. we do not have a lot of them anymore. the ones we have are pretty important to the nation. we do not have a lot of aircraft manufacturing anymore. that is pretty important to the nation. regardless, as you draw the force in, this matter of reversibility is industrial blowingd what i call
the balloon back up. there's some things if you if something were to happen any say, that is it, we will not do it, that is an irreversible decision. no one in the world is building for short takeoff and vertical landings. not another nation. we have built them. the u.k. did. the soviets built them. i think is called the f-28. but nobody else. there are some things that become irreversible. there are some units that we could blow the balloons back up in a reversing effort. you could probably rebuild.
it would take you a couple years. we have experience in doing that. is in my miss national reversibility is -- --ersibility is in line with sequestration does affect that. one of the things on the wall is the term reversibility. or talk about people and equipment and capabilities -- when we talk about people and equipment and capabilities, we need to remember that we might get this wrong. we might need to turn this back around. if i'm going to take the capability away that needs to
be purposeful decision, i need to say to myself, ok. i will never get that capability back again. >> next question. in the back. second to the last row. >> hi. thank you. ofld you address the status the acb? have speed requirements not yet been addressed. >> can you we ask your question? >> sure. government accountability office. gao. can you adjust the analysis of alternatives and the status of amphibious combat vehicles. my understanding is that water speed requirements will not be addressed until the fall.
>> i will tell you where we are. officer secretary of defense in congress directed that we do an analysis of alternatives last year. that was completed. it was held at the secretary of defense level. that completed in june of last year. what it did is that it confirmed the requirement for an amphibious vehicle. capability you could use both in a combat environment and forcible entry kind of thing if he had to do that. it certainly became the follow- on. it is a replacement for the current tractor.
it confirmed that. we took a look at that and said, ok. it did not say anything about high speed or slow speed. likeyou have a vehicle it had the capability to get up on the plane. once you got up on the plane, you could go significantly faster. the fighting vehicle was summer around 28 -- somewhere around 28 knots. you could leave the ship and go someplace where the enemy is not. the current vehicle we have is what we call a replacement vehicle. that is a vehicle that goes about -- it becomes a vehicle
that stays in swiss. it is not below the surface. swims. stays and it is not below the surface. you cannot push a heavy vehicle through the water any faster than about 8 knots. let's go back. we only get one more by at this -- bite at this. let's make sure we understand the difference between a high water speed and displacement vehicle. the analysis of alternatives is done. we are working with industry to get two corporate partners that are teamed together. they will report to the marine corps this fall and they will tell us what is possible with regard to our water speed versus displacement vehicle.
and also what the cost is. i have made a leader to everyone that cost is a variable in this -- i have made it clear to everyone that cost is a variable in this. there are host of other things. we want to get it right. by the time we get to the fall, i'll have enough information to make an educated recommendation to the secretary of the navy as to how to proceed. my sense is that will make a decision in the fall and probably around the beginning and released a request for proposal. we will have money available to do that. we have money for research and development. to the third row.
good morning, general. i wanted to ask about your special operations. -- they'reen an moving in transition in a more maritime field. what do you see the role being in the future? how about affect reconnaissance communities? >> thank you. the very proud of marine special operations. north carolina headquarters. ofy are an integral part special operations. we provide the marines.
we provide all of the equipment, the standard equipment. we provide the salaries and all that stuff. we have done well. if the admiral were here, he would confirm that. the future is bright and that kind of decade that i described. there is plenty of work available for special operations. we are partnering in it. i have got no intention of downsizing special operations. i think the value added for our nation is one of those things that is good for our nation. we are looking right now on a concept. we will prototype it this fall.
training with special operation units thatn with the will go to see on those ships. the beginning of the turn-of- the-century, every aircraft carrier had a group of seals that would be aboard it. had a team ofnit seals onboard. in 2001, that changed. the war in iraq broke out. they became preoccupied. they have not and back aboard uniqueessels except for situations. thatve agreed to a concept we will try out this upcoming
fall. marine special operations forces that will train. we've also put marine special operations teams -- excuse me, the theater command. relationship and know exactly what is available in and out of theater. we will have special operators on board the ship. they will be our eyes and ears. we will know their capabilities. is a pretty good installment to provide relevance. that is where we are heading. -- we willphasizing
wait and see. my expectations are positive. >> we have time for tumor questions. i will ask ask one of them and i will come to you. -- i -- we have time for two more questions. i will ask one of them and i will come to you. the president and china and the united states. there's a lot to talk about. i want to get at this through more of a planning and budgeting that mention in line with your -- budgeting that mention. -- dimension. it is getting a lot of attention. it is seen as a response to persistent strack weapons--s
trike weapons. i support the idea. one, are the -- services and allies becoming part of this concept is to mark initially it was primary air force and navy thought. is it something that inspires you or that you look to for guidance? are was a one-time air force and .avy heyday -- or was it a one-time air force and navy heyday? it harkens back to there-land battle. -- air-land battle.
the confrontational sounding slogan that china seems to take a little bit of that reaction to. can you comment on how you're thinking about that? >> i have not thought about that. like a lot of things when first -- to your point about the concept, it is a concept. i look at it as a phase of an operation. i think that is the safest way to look at it. it is an anti-x is ariel do now how do you deal in an environment where they do
not want you to come in? but technology has become more advanced to push them offshore or back into the air. but the area of the now -- denial is historical. it goes way back. i look at it as a phase. if we are trying to impose our will somewhere around the world, the enemies will try its best to ensure that we do not. they will do that through a variety of means. one could be kinetic weapons. --could be in their weapons air weapons. if you be weapons that go into the and come back down. -- it could be weapons that go
into the air and come back down. also cyber. the impact of cyber could prevent a force from a comp wishing its mission -- from accomplishing its mission. ande think about terrain coming on shore in a certain environment, i think we take it very seriously. it is a phase. when you are going against a determined enemy, the last thing you want to do is go with ex enemy -- go where the enemy expects you to go. put the want to do is enemy on the horns of a dilemma. it is not just bullet versus bullet or missile versus
missile. you could do that. there is a part of it that fits that. cannottermined enemies defend on every front. one forces that are capable to challenge enemy on a very wide front. there are a lot of ships that you can land around the world. it depends on where you are and what country. it drains off assets. --h an anti-access ariel aerial denial, i do not think it
is mature yet. i think it will get there. everyone worries it is a bunch of programs. it could be. it is action more than that. -- actually more than that. how do we go against an enemy that is trying to rent us from coming on shore? services are very cooperated with it. it needs to be a part of how we conceptualize. >> the man in the jacket against the wall. .> good morning
birders officer working on exchange in the pentagon. a question about major theaters of war. -- a british officer working on exchange in the pentagon. a question about major theaters of war. , the potteries -- boundaries and the roles you envision for the u.s. army. >> over the next couple of decades, how i see coalition boundaries between u.s. marine corp. partners? what do you mean? roles in you see the the u.s. marine core with [indiscernible] >> the u.s. army and u.s. marine corps and the relative roles. >> ok.
let me make a couple of comments. .e have got a phenomenal army it is designed to be a dominant land army. it is designed to go to war and dominate on the battlefield. the u.s. marine corps operates along the seams. i will try my best trying to describe the different domains. the u.s. marine corps works along the seams of all of those domains. we do not really have a domain. it depends on what the crisis is and what the need is. most of the needs we have our urgent needs. we have been on the ground for 12 or so years. i make no apologies for that. i think we more than did our mission in iraq.
where more than do our mission with our partners in afghanistan. america has a marine corps to deal with responses. something happens today and not 30 or 40 years from now. it is today. that is why the president is critical. two different missions. america does not need a second marine corps. we need a specific capability set and talent pool we bring to a crisis. as we look around international -- inity, i was just with the u.k.
as we include that asian- pacific area, our side of the marine corps and how we do business fits pretty well with most of the armies around the world. there is an infinity. -- it is not a fraternal bonding. you are responsive and adaptable and flexible. we will like to build a force kind of like that. we would like to fight along side a force like that. between the uity korean core and many of the u.s. marineween the corps and many of the world. my sense is most of the armies around the world are not designed to be a dominant land. >> general, we are grateful for
your time today and your 43 years of service. we're all thinking of you. we are thinking of you and your marines all the time. thank you to all of them and thank you to you very much. [applause] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> on the next washington journal, a look at the yahoo news operation. olivier knox looks at the philosophy of coverage and partnership at abc news. in the reporter on the latest congressional stories. rachel rose hartman talks about
the obama administration's second term in the direction it could take in the final three and a half years. plus your e-mails, phone calls and tweets. washington journal is live 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. >> president obama is fundraising in chicago this evening but there are news reports tonight that the president is set to announce and nominate james komi, former deputy attorney general to be the next director of the fbi. robert mueller is stepping down am not position. a number of reports this evening. the new york times, and writing about his time with the george bush administration, writes the deputy attorney general was a critical player in 2004 in the dramatic hospital room episode in which the white house counsel and the chief of staff try to persuade john ashcroft, who was ill and disoriented, to be often wise -- to reautri