tv Key Capitol Hill Hearings CSPAN December 23, 2013 2:30pm-4:31pm EST
will apply to which form of acreage. will it be a concession, will it be profit-sharing? these five fantastic framework regulates, but you will need people, you need rules, you need to move fast. it is whether mexico outsources and brings an external expertise to rates the gap to where they train their own own cohort of regulators. the third is radiation for the power sector. there is not enough -- as much detail in the power sector as opposed to the hydrocarbon sector. will they be able to sell to customers direct and how? what price? electricity and gasoline prices are subsidized. subsidy reform dropped out of the reform. how subsidies are dealt with i think will affect the power factor site -- reform as well. the frameworks is five independent directors, the
minister decides, relatively autonomous. how big is the dividend going to be? be government is still going to be relying on amex in the early years. in a put the money in the upstream rather than the downstream? this remains to be seen. the sixth is trusting the market. if it turns out the best economic proposition is to import gasoline, will that be ok? the seventh is local content. there is talk about the need for local content rules. what will they be? will be like brazil? it is not intended to follow the brazilian model. i think there are for terminus opportunities for mexico we're. first, it is to be best in class. this is a government and do structural reform and move quickly. among the other countries, it
implemented well. this will move mexico to the -- class not just in energy, but a country to invest in. the second is prosperity. obviously if this work, you positive traits for manufacturing, job creation, and in terms of energy investment if this model works away it is designed, mexico will be in pole position in the hemisphere. if your choice is brazil, colombia is extremely competitive. where do you want to be? i think mexico as the chance to be the most competitive.
the third his stature. the ability to implant these reforms will give it stature from transparency, from the agility, from the market competitiveness. that has credit on the international stage. to be a strategic supplier by 2025. mexican production will begin. 2023, 20 24, 2025, that is when it peaks. mexico could take that place. these reforms, as impressive as they are, are necessary but not a sufficient condition to create these reforms. you have to have the legislation and regulation. you have to have some speed. we also call it mexico rising because there is no question that while the road to implement this will be bumpy, there is no turning back. the government has made this commitment. it is a remarkable a couple and i can only say that mr. ambassador and mr. secretary, we
>> [inaudible] great. please. why don't i take the furthest away and -- mr. secretary? david, jorge, duncan? >> thank you. >> thank you so much. >> again, i am peter schechter, the director of the adrian latin america center. thank you for the presentations. last week i was reprimanded in an interview by a journalist for being too enthusiastic about what mexico has done. to my panelists, that is a warning because i'm going to try and redeem myself and be overly severe. i am going to try to center my questions on three principal areas, which is the mechanics of the reform, the business
implications of the reform, and then, what are the implications for mexico and mexico's future? i am not an energy expert. i am a commonly found washington policy civilian. let me start with duncan and asking for his comments. i would love you if you could place those comments within the context of what is is going to mean for a new north american revival, in particularly the energy industry, but now that nafta is coming on to his 20th year, what is nafta 2.0 and what is the reform in that? >> thank you for inviting me today. i would ask of the sentiment that it is a paradigm shift. i fell into it almost by
accident back in 2005. it actually emerged at a meeting in mexico city. we were talking about the future of north america. the one question that kept coming up is what we do with energy? the situation was very different back in 2005-2006. the big concern in united states is energy security. where we going to find the energy, oil, and gas to power our economy? fast-forward eight years and we are in a very different situation. the united states is now a situation where it is looking at regional energy, or north american energy independence and autonomy. it is looking at a situation where it is going through a shale revolution and feels more secure about itself. it is a very important dimensional understanding, the way in which this reform in mexico is being received in the united states. if you talk to people in houston
you see enormous excitement about the business opportunities. you speak to people in washington they say, that is great, we are happy for you guys. that is different from 2005 or 2008 when the last attempt to energy reform was put on the table and ultimately failed. north america at this point in time is in a much, much better situation than it has been in the past. mexico's reform is kind of like the icing on the cake. it means that we are going to see potentially another million barrels of oil production per day added by 2025. i would publicly put it a little bit later than that. we are going to see, rising levels of natural gas production. we are going to see the possibility -- and i think this is the key point -- more than just production figures and reserves, we see the potential now for real energy market integration in north america.
it touches on things that enrique already pointed to. we need to guarantee not to supply but stability of supply of energy for the producers of north america. we need to keep energy costs low in the united states and canada and we need to lower them significantly in mexico. partially, that is for competitiveness and partially it is because people needed. people in mexico spend up to 1/3 of their income on electricity per month. the energy reform we saw go through congress right now is something that really offers that are stability. i think it is a -- that possibility. i think it is a game changer. in the first 120 days of next year, we are going to see that. enrique, i know you graduated in 1997. i was there.
i don't know if he gave the same speech that he always did at the graduation ceremony. i had here at like 34 times as a director of row graham. that program. eloi says -- he always says -- [speaking spanish] it is moving forward. it is moving onto the next stage of life. there is so much to do and that is why this own port and we keep our focus on the oil and gas sector. >> thank you. it is a great segue for my question for jorge. while he comes from austin with a very academic hat on now, it is certainly not where he spends most of his life or it you are the only one in panel who actually was an oil executive. and in mexico. talk to us a little bit about what is going through an energy executive's mind right now and how does it seemed to him as a game changer? how does a
spanish, french, or u.s. energy executive choose between mexico or angola or trinidad? what goes through an executive's head. >> thank you for the council. thank you for being here. just like in your example, in business sometimes the easiest thing is to set up a strategic plan. the tough part is the plan to implement that strategic mission. that is the toughest part. all of us have fought to the challenges we are facing. i hate to say it, but maybe this was the easiest part of the whole energy reform part. because of all these great expectations i think there is a tough road ahead. i don't represent the industry, but after working in the ag
sector and oil sector for 35 years, five of those in mexico city, i want to basically focus my comments on three areas and that way we can get some conversation from the audience. i want to talk about pamex. they are not going away. they are not going to be privatized. i don't like the word privatization. i preferred the word recapitalization. pamex will hopefully become a place for private capital can participate in the growth of a extremely important company like them. hopefully what we will see in the future is the recapitalization of pamex. we have to make sure they are able to compete in this new world. they cannot play an important role if they have one hand tied behind their back.
10%, if not for, of the fun that is going to go to science, that is extremely important. that is one of the areas we know that is very interested in. pamex is going to what i consider a brain drain let me assure you that a lot of the geologists are going to come from there. a lot of these companies are going to hire folks from pamex. in the next five years, they are facing a lot of retirement threats from petroleum engineers and geologists are going to retire in the next 3-5 years. there is a huge knowledge base challenge that they are going to face. the most important things for
pamex to change is the culture of entrepreneurship and a culture that the company learns and oil business when they become international. they have joined in the u.s. gulf of mexico would shell. they're hoping doing that because they hope they will make money would shell what it is learning how to develop its deep water resources. it is very important that the reengineering of pamex also becomes a very important piece of this energy reform. my other comment that we will be looking at from the oil company's point of view is the sector. pamex has about a 2 million barrel demand a day. they have boilerplate, refinery capacity, but there is 1.2 of
the capacity. there is a huge gap of over 600,000 barrels a day. it is a value of over $20 billion a year deficit. it is an issue that also has to be addressed. the refinery, about a $10 billion, $12 billion project has been stable, but i think that sector is going to be extremely important in mexico. we're going to see if pamex 10 joint ventures with u.s. refineries. it takes anywhere from 3-7 years to build a refinery system. there is an adventurous possibility in the u.s. gulf of mexico.
last, and i think this is very important, is offshore safety. we were having a meeting in tampa talking about offshore safety in the gulf of mexico. we were very pleased to see that was there. they had a very important presence in that meeting because as mexico begins to drill, we have the pegasus, we have submersibles that are the drilling about 30 million -- 30 miles south of u.s. maritime border. what happens on how we are going to manage the catastrophic event like deepwater horizon in mexican waters. we do have an agreement. it is a good basic agreement between u.s. and mexico on how to handle from a technical point of view a major trans-boundary event like this. those who went to the deepwater horizon incident know how
difficult it is to manage such an event. i think that offshore safety is something that not only the industry, but the united states government and others should be very concerned with. >> thank you. let me ask and retake, who i know -- and rick a -- enrique, who i know had -- getting this done, but limit look towards the future enemy ask you about managing expectations in mexico. this reform promises a lot. a lot will not come so quickly. polls are saying that the reform is not that popular. the economy has not taken off in a definitive way. out of the president -- how does the president to going in these political parts?
as you fix the policy -- >> there was an interesting question, but first let me take on the fact this was very easy. [laughter] i'm looking forward to the difficult part. let's see how that plays out. it is truly in achievement of the country. for political parties improve the reform -- four political parties approved the reform. i think it shows the president possibly to ship. with the polls, it really depends, as in mexico -- many important issues what type of questions you ask. if you ask the majority of people, they're in favor of having a lower cost of electricity or gas. you want to privatize pamex, you have a high response of no.
this reform is not doing that, but aim to decrease the cost of electricity. i believe this reform as it evolves will show benefits to the mexican people. we have been very careful polling the instruction of the president not to establish a timeline that it is not going to be achievable. we believe, as david's study ascribes accurately, that it will take time. the reform establishes a timeline and we are going to follow it.
we pamex -- we deal with pamex and that we migrate from those two new contracts. pending on secondary legislation that will be put to congress in the next. . once they approve that, we are looking at a one year. of time for pamex to transition to contract. might be around 2015, 2016. many of the people with us today know that england's ancient in brazil andcolombia took time. shell gas and shell oil in the northern parts of the country or shallow water or round fields -- bown fields would show a reduction earlier than big water in mexico. we are estimating our oil production will increase from the 2.5 million barrels per day that we have now to around 3 million barrels per day by 2018 and to 3.5 i 2025. we think that is a fair estimate. we need it in increasing -- we need an increasing amount of
natural gas to around 8000 cubic feet per day and 10,400 by 2025. it will decrease the costs of gas electricity -- and electricity. believe the numbers are there. if you go to numbers of foreign direct investment, we have seen many of the companies that made those estimates show that about $10 billion by the end of 2018 of foreign direct investment in the sector.
that is an increase by 50% of what foreign investment is in mexico today. that is a huge job if we achieve that number by 2018. those are estimates from private sector think thanks. -- think tanks. on jobs, we believe there will be over 2.5 million jobs by 2025. those of the estimates that we have put forward to the mexican people and we believe that is obviously something we will achieve in the mid-range and long-range. we don't think we will have something immediately. in order to get it right, we have to do it one step at a time. we are permitted to do it that way. >> let me ask you, because it outlines where we are and where we are going to be. fill in for us for the civilian like me -- how to i measure progress along those roads? what are the milestones that we should be looking for that this is on time deck of if you'd to
that, who has done this really well and what example should we compare mexico to as the best case scenario? >> i have for bellwethers that i would watch in the next few months. the first is legislation. they party drafted legislation, but we need to see what those frameworks look like. what we know about the terms? legislation is the first benchmark. the second is going to be what it. if the cnh is a significant budget allocation, if we see the agencies are funded so they can hire outside help to be able to stand up to safety rules or the environment roles or even a licensing requirement, then we are going to see that we can predict -- the regulators will
be in a position to move swiftly when the time comes. the third is outsourcing and in the power sector, you will need a lot of or information about the nature of distribution, whether there is metering at the houses. what are the size of the load centers? that information is going to have to be organized and presented for investors in a way they can understand. i be watching their budget and if there is no help on their. fourth would be leadership. would we see shadow leaders of these processes? we should start to see shadow leaders for the safety effort for the environmental effort probably if there is a tossing up the leadership. those of the for bellwethers for me. resulted a right the first time but then their second reform has taken it back. i would say the opening to the upstream, norway, brazil, following that model, the transparency. i think the u.s. and norway have
done it but algeria did it, iraq did it, libya did it. the system of open criteria. you open the envelope and see who wins. the independence of the regulators, i think it remains to be seen whether they are safety case or performance standards are what kind of regulators they are going to be. colombia has a terrific regulator. i think it is only norway that has done this with the kind of political and fiscal independence that mexico has got. >> can i come in here? i think it is worth spending a moment to talk about the regulators. that is the key element right now. the question a lot of us have is, we have a very small, underfunded national commissioner at this time and in a relatively short. of time we are expecting them to either find the human capital in
mexico or bring them in from outside. i think that is a real danger here. david said very well -- is the commission going to be allowed to recruit international? would have the resources to do it? will be attractive enough? if it is not a strong, autonomous regulator then it will be a real problem for both companies wanting to invest in mexico and for the benefits that
would be distributed to the mexican people. >> jorge, what role can institutions like yours play in cooperating in some of the technical assistance? >> i think there are a lot of universities in the united states that had a long relationship with mexico and pamex. we have numbers at we are working now on shell gas development. we're talking about water resources along the border and what impact shell development could have to water resources. certainly our universities -- by the way, partnerships with we have with the national science foundation -- the resources are there for us on our side of the business. again, the academic and research side of business to add value to this process. remember, there is a heavy involvement in research and process -- partnerships in the american universities with the private sector. there is no question that a u.s. institution and incorporation with partnership with mexican institution can play a key role.
>> this is a very important issue. the constitutional reform has taken notice of this. one of the stronger elements of the reform is that article 28 of the cost of tuition, of regulators -- of the constitution, of regulators have to attain a constitutional status. they have granted technical it autonomy. then something that is called [speaking spanish]. what is this mean? for the service provided, they collected fee. up until now that fee would go into the ministry of finance and into the budget. they wouldn't be allowed to keep that fee. now they would be allowed to keep the fee and allow to have it in a trust account. in a trust account up to three years of their yearly budget. that means they will have a trust account for almost three years of what their budget is
like. they would have enough resources that would be for why their own services to be able to do all these type of things. we are holding from a system that is mostly out to regulate into a system that will be regulated by others. we are migrating into that and we are fully aware that we have to be very careful into that transition. there will be two new members for each of these regulators. there are right now five members. they're going to be a seven- member regulatory board. this is because of increasing the weekly that workload. -- this is because of increasing the workload. we think will be a fundamental part of the new model we have achieved. >> all of you have mentioned the word transparency in your marks- mentioned the word transparency
in your marks, your comments. clearly, the reform aims to turn a page. how did the mexican government guarantee that transparency? particularly in light of pamex becoming eventually more independent. how they prove their independence from the very beginning? what are the steps of transparency, really con street concrete steps people will be looking for? >> i think the first step is to really learn what best practices are out there in the world are it the second thing is to -- that needs to be available online and easily accessible. it should not be hidden behind various hurdles you have to get over. industry has to play a role in making sure that things remain open.
the international oils in -- oil industry his story has not been the most transparent industry. in recent years, they have started to realize that transparency works in their favor. civil society lays a role and the government should work with it. >> i think the role of the industry has changed considerably in the last 20 or 50 years. i think we do welcome transparency. we do welcome good governance. we have many companies -- countries in the world in which we have huge challenges because there are a lot of things we would like to implement that as part of the corporate core or the corporate belief, in some companies it is extremely difficult to implement. i think transparency not only from the industry is welcome, but also i think transparency in the whole process is welcome.
there is a lot of data, both isaac -- seismic data, that we have to share now. that consortiums in universities in which five or six different private companies participate in them. they share knowledge and they share new licenses and new procedures. transparency is very important, but good governance within the country in we operate is extremely important. i think that will be the case in mexico, by the way. i don't have -- i don't have any question, having lived there and having traveled there for the last five or six years regularly, that there is a culture change. that there is a new reengineering not only of pemex but reengineering of mexican society. we have to be -- by the way, i don't mean to reform process was
easy. folks have to understand -- i did say that. [laughter] but i didn't mean that. people have to understand -- the first thing when i was sent to mexico, believe it or not, i corporation sent me -- my corporation sent me for a three- week course in mexican history. you have to go back to the mexican-american war of 1847, 1848. people forget that the u.s. marines were in the port of veracruz in that time. there is history of that whole culture. it also ties to be march of 1938 that we have to understand. the political and historical currents that it took the administration to move this reform forward. yes, even though from a historical-political context, the process was difficult and not easy, what i meant to say is that from a business point of view, this is the easy part, now comes the imitation so we can
get to those targets that we are looking at four 2020. >> i would add really people -- wrigley that -- i would add quickly that it is remarkable that people have to look at the constitutional status that contract transparency, custom 40 transparency, and reporting of the distributions of the national fund are basically commanded at the constitutional level. i don't think there is another country in the world that has a constitutional level directive for transparency. i think that is impressive. i think smaller steps that will be important is that looking what the auction system looks like and join something like the extracted industry transparency initiative will give a platform for civil society to
participate. it is a popular international movement. >> limited the last word before open up to wetjen's -- let me give you the last word before we open up to questions. >> we went to different countries to see how the different oil models work and we learned from those who have transparency limits that work well. we have put them into the constitution so we can have a mandate, a very clear mandate to make them enforceable in the law in the regulatory next steps. we are fully committed and i think that is most important. the mexican people are not satisfied with the way transparency has been dealt with in the past. we need to do it better. we'll civil society will be highly --. we are analyzing it. >> thank you. i would like to bring all of our other guests here and, sir, why don't i begin with you?
>> stephen donahue. thank you very much. perhaps it is on purpose, but there is some ambiguity about the issue of booking reserves. david, in the paper, says it is clear that it is the intention to allow companies to be able to benefit from the future you of what they are doing. i have not heard you quite say that. we tell us how the government of mexico will use this going forward? that really is the fundamental issue? >> what congress has achieved in the constitution, we believe, is standard practice. in the contracts, has to be established that the property of oil and gas of the mexican nation.
but those contracts are also available to be able to report the future benefits of those contracts for filling the legal request that the companies have. we are going to standard international practices. that is worried we see the transitory article. >> i will add that the sec will ultimately want to look at the contracts and look at if there is an element of risk. if they see that in the form of the contracts, they will make a determination if those reserves are able to be booked by companies. in terms of the political culture from both talking to our colleagues here and some of the opposition parties and appreciating that the threshold for legislation is aware than the threshold or constitutional reform, the entire initiative makes no sense absent the
ability of companies able to vote reserves. there is deep knowledge and recognition on the part of the government that if companies cannot book reserves, they will not invest. they would not have gone through all this effort to try and worse is constitutional change knowing it would take constitutional change without it. you have to see the contract. in the legislation -- those are the two big bellwethers. how much the definition of the schemes are defined in the legislation and how much visibility there is on the terms because there are all these companies that have models and a crunch them, what is the return on investment, and that it's what makes mexico and not curtis tanner some other place you -- and notkurdistan or some other place. >> my question is about national content and what the thinking is around national content. that has been a big issue on the hemisphere and the extent to which of mexico deals with the national content issue. it will put it more competitive
or less competitive versus other options in the hemisphere? >> one of the constitutional transitory articles says that in secondary law we will establish percentages in the areas in the timeframe for national content. what we have learned in other countries is that it is important to one of the outcomes is to have a strong, national industry that produces services and participate actively in a transformation of the oil sector. we're aiming for that. it will be in the secondary legislation that we will establish the guideline. we are also aware that some of the examples in other countries have been that you put such strict rules international content that it slows down imitation of the report or that it makes it more expensive in its process of implementation. another strong element is establishing direct investment. we are looking for companies out
there right now based in the u.s. that would be able to be based in mexico and have an important offices there and producing things there and mexico in order to bring them instead of buying the product from the united states to buy products from mexico heard -- mexico. brazil has been very successful in achieving that. its own private sector has become a worldwide reducer of services in the oil sector. we are aiming at that. we are also aware that we have commitments in free trade agreements that establish we have to have equal treatment of investments. in order to crack the secondary legislation, we have these three elements to put into place in a correct way. >> as we are sitting here today, there are a number of exit in companies today in houston already talking to u.s. companies, in particular service contract and petroleum service company.
it is not only foreign investment of the issue of foreign dollars going, but i think countries will come over here to join adventures with u.s. companies. you will see in the next five years a very considerable number of very good quality exit and companies that are going to be the future -- very good quality mexican companies that are going to be the future of the industry. i think the mexico case will be different from the brazil case. someone asked about nafta. i think this is an area where the nafta infrastructure is going to help the relationship between mexican small companies, medium-sized companies, small companies that provide services and equipment to the oil and gas industry in mexico during your venture with the u.s.. that is a huge area of growth to me, by the way. >> is important to remove her that we sit here in washington
or houston say, we don't want the national content requirements to be too high because that will be a barrier to investment. we also don't want it to be too low because part of this goal -- if this is not just about oil and gas, it is about helping the mexican economy, about increasing competitiveness and adding jobs. if we want this to be sustainable in the long term, the mexican people need to feel a benefit from it. that is why i think it is incumbent upon both as is and government right now to work together to work out what would be a fair level of the national local content for the government and pemex in particular to work with providers throughout the country to build a national, indigenous supply throughout the country. >> the back of the room. sir? the gentleman who was standing?
>> secretary ochoa, peggy for coming to washington and thank you for your powerpoint presentation. my question concerns the valuation of blocks. prior to an auction on international market prices, who will determine the valuation existing fields and what are the criteria which will be used to determine their value? flex -- >> thank you very much. i will leave that presentation to the atlantic council and thank you very much for having me. the ministry will make a balance with information from the commission. ministry of finance will make a fiscal calibration of the contracts and then the bidding process will be taken off by the national hydrocarbons commission will announce the winner & the
contract on behalf of the mexican state. the secondary legislation will establish the framework for which we will do those economic analyses. the industry will require case- bike-case -- case-by-case analysis. we will allow secondary relations to establish a framework and it will be up to the ministration this ministry of energy and ministry of finance on its responsibilities to turn in each contract depending on the quality of the field. >> this is an area of risk, i think, to take an area -- say show fields or deepwater -- as a this is the framework we're going to apply and these are roughly the terms, it creates a way to scale a lot of acreage
and one-time for auction where the market will determine the price. if it is feel-bi-field -- fioe field-by-field, then you run into problems -- problems of, will it be a way for pemex to get preferential rights? i know that is not the design. i think you should focus on what is the most efficient way to get those blocks up for auction and how much flexibility there will be for companies that hire -- have higher risk in other areas because of the cost versus profit sharing. >> who is done the aged -- acreage valuation correctly? >> are actually, at least in the deepwater gulf of mexico. we run the seismic. we do a geologic assessment. we make that data available manning goes up for auction.
market determines the price. in times we have seen high risk like in shale gas, but like in the deepwater wind guest rices were -- in deepwater were prices were $10. both of those incentives expired when we did that. we saw an area of high risk and wanted to maximize the rewards. we did it by area, by type of geology rather by field. i think the norwegians do something similar. even the u.k. has something for marginal fields and one for deep water. i think it is easier bureaucratically on the licensee licensing agency. >> deepwater versus shale, for example. >> we're following that. the first variation allowed by secondary legislation and then we will -- >> gentleman in the back, i know, has been waiting for a while.
>> thank you. thank you, secretary ochoa, for being here. mr. duncan mentioned the prices of electricity in mexico being a little bit too high, especially in the northern parts. i am a witness of this. even the production will open up and production costs will lower down because of the openness, distribution in electricity and gasoline will -- electricity is still controlled by a national company. what opportunities will be there? is it considered about opening up the national company and what opportunities could be there for businesses? >> that is a very good question. that was a part of the energy reform. strong transformation in the electricity sector. this is not my field, but let me give you some of the important
lines of this reform. the transmission industry are monopolies. the way this reform allows private participation is through contracts through cfe. it is the national power company. this is the way that the brazilians did their own transformation that allow the of the company to establish contracts that will allow it to build a new transmission industry. keep in mind that 80% of the price of electricity comes from that cost of the fuel that you used to produce it. that is a big opportunity there for natural gas to have an impact in the whole area. the other important part in mexico is an inefficient distribution system where we are losing around 20% of electricity
that we conduct. this is due to technical failures in some areas. it is more like social problems that have introduced and people are not paying or people are stealing the electricity. through these contracts, we will find a mechanism to make these lines more efficient. if you see the percentage, having a market of electricity, having substantial natural gas and were nobles -- renewables that can with a mix of gas and electricity will make the cost go down significantly. if that is a percent of because of electricity, we can translate that to the consumer and have better prices. it is a huge transformation as well and i would suggest that you invite the undersecretary of electricity in january. the reform is very important because it was a reform.
they got to a secondary position but hydrocarbons have taken more of the attention. electricity is very important, too. >> you transmit to the undersecretary that the floor is open for him. david, i know there is a section of the report on electricity. >> the undersecretary is well known in washington. we would be delighted to have her here. i think this is an area where there is great opportunity but the framework makes all the difference. it may be in mexico that distributed generation is going to be the first area of opportunity rather than great extension. places where people can have relatively small areas of electricity. there needs to be visibility and flexibility in legislation to allow those relatively smaller generators to be able to sell directly to customers. relying on cfe for collections when collections are not good and relying on them for transmission security when
transmission is already weak will be a source of insecurity for it investors. some flexibility there would be helpful. subsidy is the other question because as long as residential communities -- residential communities are subsidized, -- you can create a system where you can extend transmission and ring in the capital. at some point, you're going to have to open up the residential base. no one will be able to provide electricity cheaper than an existing subsidized system. in the initial draft of the reform there had been a transitory note that called for moving general subsidies to targeted subsidies which would be classic economic theory. right now, everyone in mexico city gets there first 250 kilowatts of electricity free, whether you are or you need subsidy from the government. it is the framework that i think still need to be worked out. >> as many of you in the room know, is a bazaar pricing system in mexico.
it really is. some people and up paying very little and some people that's when you jump over the barrier in terms of residential consumption, the cost of every unit of electricity you have used goes up in or mislead. working out -- goes up enormously. working out how to use the subsidies but at the same time lowering the cost is part of the conundrum we are looking at right now. it is very important in political terms because this is where the average mexican is going to feel the benefit of the energy reform. yes, we can talk about jobs and competitiveness and all the other great things, but the average mexican on the street wants to see that promise of
lower energy costs and lower fuel costs as well really come through within a reasonable. of time. once you have a greater participation by private -- in the system and want to lower the cost of these natural gas for combined cycle generation, which does not necessarily need to happen because of the reform. it can happen big thank you. take us to andto from the web as well. quite -- >> i worked for pem ex for a number of years and have looked at a number of wealth. the geologic potential is very
good. turning to the issue of security thinkerations, how do you that will play out? one of the elements of constitutional reform is an institution will be created to overlook industrial the and environmental issues, which is going to be dependent of the ministry of environment. that institution was created thinking about institutions. institution regarding an accident. then they have to make a report. that institution will take care of them. mexico bounty was
cleared as part of the budget deal. when we were launching that, we thought that would be a baby step to cooperate with mexico on safety in the gulf of mexico. librarythis would be a of four u.s.-mexico cooperation. we have certainly learned about the deept least in water oil spill mechanisms. so i think that is one of the areas over the next month where we could have bilateral and hemisphere cooperations. something we talked about. that process authority in place and has been in place before the energy reform. there is cooperation and work between the u.s. industry and coast guard. in november there was a meeting
in tampa in which x again officials were there. is in place.s all that i wanted to underscore and highlight, again to maybe say everything in this world is easy as far as the agreements and paperwork is concerned, implementation is a very difficult challenge. the deepwater horizon policy. able tonterest of being work hand-in-hand, that will bring an transfer a lot of knowledge for how we manage the business. so i think that is an area we will see quite a bit of. not only an offshore drilling, but in pipe line transportation. also, on shore fieldwork. , the public security on shore in particular.
the question i get asked a lot, and my standard response is, look at where the oil industry operates globally. not always in exactly the safest laces. they know how to deal with security threats. the one potential exception is the smaller operators that might benefit from a boom in the shale business in northern mexico. that is where he really had to keep focused on the question of rule of law in mexico where we have to keep focused on trying to focus on the were levels of .iolence across the country in particular, lowering the cost of doing business because although it has not been a disincentive for investment, it does raise the cost of doing business when you have to face the threat of kidnapping, extortion, etc.. for the bigger companies, not
the big eel. for the smaller companies, something they need to factor in. >> good morning. going back to the electricity there. the idb opening of the sector to perp -- to private participation. >> not that i am aware of. the transportation in the reform thatu will allow something happened in 1995. allow cooperation of private sector in generation for consumption and to sell it to nearby big businesses.
questionbeen put into because it was not a constitutional amendment. several attempts to amend the constitution in order to put the model into place. we're doing is establishing something that is already there. a third of the power production is owned by the private sector are. thiswe are achieving with reform is not only a constitutional base to do so but so we cana market have the lowest cost producers first. that will be a substantial way to reduce prices of the future. this will decrease the cost of production of what the city in bodyo and an independent that would separate electricity areas distribution
according to costs that would be able to transfer the benefit. getting the subsidy system right in order to decrease externalities. this is part of the whole implementation plan that would reach thewere cost to bill. -- howre is one area about product branding and retail? the oldest places in mexico are not owned by pam at. they are owned i private operators and dealers. in the legislation or secondary legislation, are we looking at the ability of private branding as number one? privateperator of the
land going to be able to import their own gasoline so that deficit can be met by a new operator? model going to be somewhere in the revision of the reform? >> we are ready imports 50%. there is no benefit for the consumer. ist we are looking at legislation to open up ranting and service. sector toans private import gasoline, that is what we are currently doing. be in the process. we can increase capacity inside the country. we are mentioning seeing it in
the u.s.. the irony is we have them already. it is a joint venture with shell . this is from the early 1990s. if they would want to bring the and do what itco is doing in texas, until the reform, they were forbidden to do so. that is ironic. you can ask the oil company to do a joint venture, but forbid it to do it in the country. we have entered a reform in congress. to do the be allowed joint venture in mexico. looking for important venture. structurew the legal that will allow the sinks to happen. always the opportunity to divide private
financing. it turns out is the number one customer. they want content. i think having the participation would give comfort to private investors. something for the shareholders to encourage. >> i have a question for those watching on the web. thisuestion is, what does mean for the broader u.s.-mexico relations? i will add immigration, commerce, could this -- additional operation? >> a question i get quite a lot. what i think has been fascinating and incredibly well handled the government over the past 10-1520 years how the government has respect good mexico sovereign right to determine its own energy future. by role that has been played
the u.s. government. a foreign services officer said to me was this the result of greek pressure and they be able -- they begin to came up with a conspiracy theory that was really bizarre. i said hold on a second. i said this does not happen. the united dates government has always been incredibly .espective -- respect full this is in terms of a national debate in terms of mexico and a long process. the implications are very positive. partly because of increased business integration, but mostly is increased integration of markets. increased production system in north america.
they are depending on each other to enhance competitiveness. that is what this opens the possibility for. guaranteeing stability of supply. making sure u.s. producers can stay there. areas, you mentioned security for example. these are areas where i see there will be a very positive the mexicanor people and economy. already we see zero net migration from mexico to the united states. partly that is the result of the met graphics and a tougher climate in the united states. our leak as a result of greater economic act entity. about 100,000 new jobs in the energy sector there is something we should celebrate. that means more 15 euros mexican see the future in the country as opposed to leaving.
to the point of security, if you are a young man who lives in a marginalized area and have no economic act to these, there are very but all choices for you. are you going to migrate or go into organized crime? this offers you another way out. this is all of the changes happening in education and the economy. it relieves pressure on the bilateral relationships on the long run. >> did you want to add to something? >> let me ask you. relation that the cast that is being negotiated in some of the free trade discussions. i think the more mexico more of the domestic
.arket, the more value there is the united states is a slightly different position. export andal to relatively low prices, that gives us basically a bargaining chip to use as the trade negotiations that are indispensable for us. i think mexico would be a collateral beneficiary of that. i am not so certain mexico will become an exporter in the next 10-15 years given the incredible amount of domestic demand and the relatively low price of gas right now. i am not sure it is quite as big of a deal as it is for us. >> the first objective with the reform of this sort is to have enough oil, natural gas
produced in mexico for the world market. i think you are right, mexico ngll not be an exporter of l in the near future. the first task to reduce imports that we have of natural gas, and that will boost a new implementation of our country electricity.re these reforms were made for 50 years. these reforms have been mostly in the long-term. i think we will see a different scenario 10 years ahead of us. in order for those benefits to come into place, we have to start now. one of the important things we have done, the first big step, we have our eyes looking into the future industry.
we have to look at what is happening in mexico from the view of the united states. if you look at the keystone , when an area is approved, between the keystone pipeline and all of the west- east and down to the east coast type lines that will be opening up, the u.s. coast refining system will have the capacity of at least another 3 million barrels per day of capacity. mainly canadian crude. will itcomes down, what displaced? if it is not going to displace the crude, i could certainly tell venezuela and colombia in importer of crude. now it is going to be different because i have a pipeline where
all i have to do is open the valve. we are talking energys this mexico ju reform will open up something we have not seen before. i go back to mexico, canada, and the united states. to get our heads together. certainly from the energy point of view we can become the power to be. there was an interview yesterday about the energy revolution and the oil available. i think regional integration is very important for all of the economies and moving forward. after mexico meets the energy demand what can be important is the product trade. most of the u.s. products are
going to the hemisphere. so depending on how widespread demand is, you can see 15-20 years out. a lot of the problems we have had so far in the current -- caribbean and very high carbon consumption in america could be resolved by cooperation between mexico and the caribbean. there has not been a source close enough. colombia has talked about it. we're probably talking about not only north america, but hemispheric energy integration on an unprecedented scale. >> we have been talking about mexico playing an important role . >> we could go on for a number of more hours. i will have to draw it to a close. i appreciate everyone's participation.
an announcement for the members of the press that would like to interview the under secretary and some of our guests. if you could meet at the back of the room, that would be great. an expression of thanks to all of you for purchase of paving. it has been an amazing thing to watch in mexico. not only from the point of view review to passl this reform, but the ability in which you did the reform. not only this reform, but in the past 12 months there has been education reform, a reform of the financial and tax system, political reform and culminating a year in couple days of the first year the president with the energy reform. i think you could divide washington with the harvard case study about how to get things done. happy holidays to everybody.
our interview with a bid stock in and recent author of " the great affirmation -- d eformation." hasnk the success that been contributed to reaganomics is totally unwarranted. we have the greatest deficit binge between 1981 the end of firstsh administration, bush. those are all really the reagan program. so we did have an economy that becaused to close -- poker killed inflation because the deficit was an honor -- huge but they established a precedent for continuous, massive deficits and put the republican party, the old spender of the treasury gate into the position that cheney so it would -- and eloquently expressed deficits
don't matter. if there is not a conservative hardy that is defending the treasury, the taxpayers, you will have a free lunch competition between tax cutters and spenders, the democrats, and that is why you have 17 trillion of national debt today and why it is out of control and why we have a doomsday machine. >> you can watch the entire interview tonight at 7:00 eastern right here at 7:00 on c- span. >> as 2013 wraps up, we are here on the west front of the u.s. capitol to tell you about the year in review series. a look at the five important series we have covered. tonight, immigration laws. tuesday, senate filibuster role changes. nsa surveillance wednesday.
thursday a look at gumballs and wrapping up the week friday with the u.s. budget and federal -- u.s. federal government shut down. starting tonight on c-span. the thing i care about most is to make it more of the museum to make it with beautiful footage of presidents. there more antique furniture? i would have thought they would have been collecting this from the beginning of the republic? thomas jefferson did the most wonderful job putting in beautiful furniture. the sad thing is the war of 1812 when everything was burnt. every president who came could sell what they did not like. they used to have auction in the square.
then the president could change that the court if he wanted. once president grant had the blue room violet. finally that was all stopped at the time of the it or roosevelt. >> season to. this week weeknights at 9:00 on c-span. >> a group of washington journalists, including peter , kellymark leibovitz o'donnell and jake tapper recently talked about 2013's biggest political headlines, the challenges of covering the white house and some of the lessons they have learned. this is just over an hour.
>> the block buster roundtable breakfast. appreciate you coming out early. very excited to have some of washington's most fascinating and most respect did journalist to talk about what we just all and will give us a preview of what we are about to see. on in ahave them come second. three of them are best-selling off there's. we will talk a little bit about their books, two. -- best selling authors. talking about some of the most important issues in washington. as always, we would love to get your questions, rebuttals. this. #playbook for we would like to welcome all of you in to help you will tweet
along with us. now i would like to welcome our panel. come on up. [applause] >> thanks, mark. thank you very much. whoave jake tapper of cnn this year started the lead on cnn and author of "the outpost." it is an amazing more story available in paperback now. you probably have not heard of kelly o'donnell, nbc white house nor -- white house correspondent. covered news in l.a. and new york. mark leibovitz had a book this year. also a new york times best seller. , a friend since the
washington post days when you were covering very scary. i was with the richmond times dispatch. peter's amazing book about the bush administration is seven years of work. weekend in new york times magazine picked it as the best non-fiction books of the year. to kick things off on the if you could interview anyone in 2014, who waited the? >> first can i say how i met your? -- met you? we were at the reform party convention. dearborn, michigan. you were with the new york times. darting around. quite exciting. that is when jesse venture a was talking about taking over the party. good times. >> i thought he was the pick for
who to interview? >> he is not. if it is anyone in the world? i guess edward snowden, i would love to interview him. i would like to do a long interview with him not just his life, but why he did it. a very close second would be pope francis. i do not know which one is less likely to happen. i am willing to travel to russia, brazil, russia, hong kong, or the vatican for any of the interviews. rex edward snowden -->> so edward snowden, if you're watching -- >> what would you like to ask him that you do not know now? >> i would like to know what he makes of the talk and commentary
about how different he is from his predecessors? i wonder how much he feels he is. and how intentional versus how much is media jumping on comments. when you read the comments he has made, it does not seem accidental. does not seem as though the media is jumping on this to drive a wedge between him and predecessors. you would want to do an actual program five program take down on what he objects to and why. i think psychologically you would want to know what made him snap? what made him decide to do this incredibly bold and risky act? what drove it psychologically for him? it is not like you go to the national security agency thinking you are not going to be conducting surveillance and there are not going to be questionable practices, or at least ones on the edge. ?
>> kelly o'donnell, you are on capitol hill for this amazing year. last week on the day that paul ryan ryan and patty murray made the deal, reuters did a story, u.s. budget deal could usher in new era of operation. what are the chances? >> i think there is a moment for modest cooperation, a certain buzz that is getting along is a worthwhile thing. we have seen that before. i think there is a certain premium that is given to encourage them to get along. i think the institutional forces make that difficult, but if they get enough crazy and feel a payoff, i think that can be helpful. that is my optimistic sense. i think that can go off the rail
at any point. >> yesterday we were e-mailing about possible topics. i asked hugh, what mistake d.c. journalists often make. >> agreed to do the playbook request. >> and in second choice, sinking be elected officials they are writing about, and they said thinking too much about the officials acting so solicited of them and wanting to be their friend. have you ever made that mistake? >> i was worried just this follow-up would happen. i thought the first question i would get is why did you agree to do this? i am thrilled to be here. thank you all for coming. it was not a mistake, it was reality. it happened once.
i am friendly with many public officials. there was one public figure that i felt like i had a personal relationship that i would not write about. 7.5 years ago i wife had breast cancer. i was writing a profile of elizabeth edwards and john edwards the weekend after she announced she had a relapse. that was supposed to be the print interviewer of them in vegas. that day my wife gets a diagnosis. i told her then pr rep that i cannot make it. then elizabeth edwards called. she was an incredible friend through that. so then i recused myself from
all edwards-related stories. >> why are journalists to solicitous? >> i do think one of the mistakes in journalism and washington generally is people accrue their own self-worth to the institution they are working for. the function they are trying to play. meaning, people think a politician is being so nice to me and solicitous of me because they really like me and think i am special and we can be friends and it is really cool that senator x and y come to my wedding. look at this and we can show all of this off. in fact, it can be a real seduction game. >> you have known some of these members and senators for years
and years. how do you avoid having them think you are their friend? >> i do not think we are personal friends, i think we are professional friends. i think there is value in being friendly and knowing that their interests. i think there is benefit in the simple nicety of life in getting along, but i do not think i am personal friends is anyone that i cover. >> who there is the friendliest? who maybe thinks the friend is the press is their friend? >> the trap door is right here. i think politics often will draw into it. people who have the need for -- i will not name a name, only because i have to go to work or today. there are friendly people, and i appreciate the friendliness. i find that i have the best relationship with people that i
have been to their home state and have been to their district. i think there is a different dimension to knowing them in that way. >> what is the speaker like when reporters are around? >> he is pretty frank and direct. >> i thought i should alert fire officials. he is very warm. i think he is willing to give us respective i enjoy those moments because it helps you in turn it public activities. the eight years of the bush administration, but you are also one of the most astute of bert observers of the obama administration. it does help you interpret his public act entities and public statements a bit more if you have a sense of what he was thinking when there were no cameras around. >> you have this amazing history
of the eight years of the bush administration but also one of the most astute observers of the obama administration. yesterday a story was posted online with the headline, this is the end of the presidency now . a trick. referring to bush. the point is a lot of perils between the fifth year of obama and fifth year of bush. how deep is the obama hole? >> there are parallels. i think we can get wrap up in the silly debate. that is true. -- truth is, what is similar ? newspaper it was your that made that point. >> the point that we try to make that the political positioning is similar. obviously for different reasons
and different dynamics. the point was president obama one year after reelection has found himself, his the trust that people have in him has diminished. more than 50% do not think he is telling the truth all the time. his reputation is challenged. and you saw the potential ramifications of that. he fell below 50% approval rating and mark show of the fifth year in office. he never got above that again. he went longer than any president before with less than majority support. that has had a substantial impact. he did not immigration a second term. the society that he articulated did not go anywhere.
that is a danger for president obama. the difference is the overarching albatross for president bush was the iraq war. president obama does not have that. in theory he can get past this moment and can recover. you can lose 10 points in a week, but cannot get 10 points back in a week. you tend to get it back one week at a time. >> you have a sentence here that says even to the extent that president bush salvaged a failing more through the surge after years of living is general call the shot, he could not openly salvaged the presidency. at this moment, is it possible the presidency looks better than iraq? >> that is a good question. he is definitely in a better place today than he was when he left office. the numbers in some ways are better than president obama. in the summer he had a 49% rating. that is the first time in eight
years he had a positive net. i think that results from the fact that we tend to be more reflective and ponder about ex presidents than we are in the moment. i think that his quiet grace after leaving office has probably helped him with a lot of people. >> why does he do that? he has this amazing platform. what did they tell you about why he has run so clearly under the radar? >> he did not much like president second-guessing him when he was in office. he reacted badly to that. he does not want to do that to president obama. i think he is tired of politics. i think he is just done. he said when he saw obama's hand
andp on inauguration day, he thought to himself, free at last, free at last. only would happen in this town. [laughter] that when he is leaving office. he recalls morgan freeman had been president himself. that is where the lannett -- that a comet hits the planet and destroys all civilization. i think he was exhausted. did not want to be part of the whole environment anymore. >> president bush flew with president obama. hitched a ride on air force one to the nelson mandela funeral. during the flight he came back, chatted with a reporter longer
than on air force one probably on the air force -- probably than the whole presidency combined. it is off the record, but what have you heard about what he said? >> i am under no obligation. the reports i have heard is he came back for 90 minutes. he left at one point and came back with laura a second time. without giving anything away, i think in general he was very relaxed. chatting about painting. has obviously picked up a hobby. he was chatting about his life today, about his presidency. he was reflecting on world leaders, things like that. he was asked about the book. he did not participate in the book. he says he has not read it.
>> very generally, what does he think about it? >> i think i imagined he would be upset about is for nothing else that equal billing with cheney. cheney on the is cover?" i think the reason we framed the book that way he cuts if you are going to write about the bush presidency, you had to address that question anyway. it was more interesting than we quite new at the time. why not use it as a structure for the eight-year story. while the book punctures the myth that he was somehow the secret master running everything, i think president bush is probably annoyed he is on the cover with him. >> jake tapper, this year you launched the lead on cnn after being chief white house correspondent for abc news.
what was it like to adapt to the role from correspondence to anchor? >> a completely different job. i imagine going from reporter to editor. you are responsible for an entire hour. i do not have to beg to be on air. ultimately also, i am responsible. if there is a mess up, i am responsible. if there is a story selection that is not the best, i am responsible. so there is a greater freedom editorially to assert what i think is important. to report on things i had trouble getting on air as a correspondent, specifically related to the white house. that is freeing, but also comes with the burden of being in charge of something and being responsible for something, which criticism comes a lot more than compromise.
>> there is a lot of cable news out there. how do you try to make your lead the signature? >> we're trying to do is -- to do a fun, smart news program. if you pick up a copy of the new york times and there are five stories, one is money, world, politics and what is pop-culture and you read all five of them, that is what we try to do every day and try to get a wide array of stories. we also tried to do it in a way where hopefully you cannot tell what my political leanings are, which helps with today's cable- tv landscape. it distinguishes it from competitors in some ways. >> at a time when we're all reading to so much on our device, how does cable news state central? >> i think there are two ways we can do it.
we do not always succeed. one of them is obviously what is going on at 4:00 or 7:00 or 9:00, whatever the case may be is important. more important than what you saw on your ipad3 hours before. -- your iphone three hours before. also trying to get smart people and contacts for the story, things that everyone on this panel except for kelly has been on the lead. >> i watch. >> thank you. >> i turn up the volume. >> we would have you any time you want to come on. >> i think there would be a very gracious combination of that. >> you have been on. we're trying to get smart people to talk about the events of the day and talk about things you have not talked about obviously. people who read the news or are relatively savvy news consumers. we need to bring something to the table other than what they are ready no.
>> kelly o'donnell, you have been a news correspondent in new york, l.a., and d.c. what is the difference of the 3 big news capitals? >> i am so grateful i had a chance to do work at the network level in other places, because i did not fully appreciate until i got to washington really does happen in america, too. i found everything from covering the the -- the o.j. simpson trial to fires and floods and the urgent -- emergency urgent to the entertainment things. in those days i was in l.a., it was before "access hollywood," so we actually did entertainment stories. the variety that jake is talking about, being able to do that in
the course of telling stories is so helpful. i have been on the board and doing a variety of stories along the border, and that gave me context personally. you may not always find its way into the story but certainly frames how i look at it. in new york everything from launching international stories to being on wall street on all things that have helped in covering politics here. my favorite times are when you get out in the country and get to talk to real people, as we say, and see them in their lives and hear what is interesting to them, and people are quite bold about telling you what they like and do not like. great to get that feedback. >> what is the feeling for telling the bigger story. that is always hard. has always been hard. >> when you do it, the power is incredible. >> remedy is very compelling. i always look at it that we are all writers here, but in some ways it is like the person
predict the -- writing the record, the song, leary, all the team the production team can put to it and there is a different impact. just hearing the basic melody. with tv news on the there is a way you choose the news, choose the soundbite and images, whether they be video or graphic inks, and that combination gives you the experience of being there. i think that is what we go for. with tv news, you choose your soundbites and images. that combination is what gives you the experience of being there. it translates the experience. >> as you know, i am from the l.a. area. they just do not care. do people really care? >> in a different way. i mean, d.c. is an industry town.
about media and moviemaking and new technologies, and there are many social things from the west, which i found very interesting when working there. i do not think people care about what they usually care about, but that is ok. that is where you got that title. i tease these guys in the backs who are all signing books. so i think people do not care. they do not necessarily speak the same language. legislation or politics, but they do care about how it affects lives. it does affect people's lives. >> i just am going to interject, if i could. i am friends with a lot of , and a lot of them were e-mailing me and face poking me
booking me, and they knew that there cost of living was going to go down. guys do not make a lot of money in the service, and a lot of them are messed up due to their time in the service. a bipartisan compromise. it affects people in the real world, and whether you support -- compromise or not, >> and the impact. you have them saying, we will find a way. we will find a way to adjust that. this effect of the cost of living. it can have an impact.
>> in this town, my favorite chapter, you write, political often get blamed for ramping up political news. playbook is an insider's dog's breakfast. town, sightings around birthday greetings to people you have never heard of. is it that bad? [laughter] >> dogs eat breakfast. i.e. reckless. again, i absolutely dispute the fact. >> what is the most legitimate criticism? [laughter] would you like me to step back? >> the most legitimate?
i would say, putting it in the context of this conversation, actually, put it this way. i would say this. what i think can be a very, very dangerous things. the leading thinkers, and what i mean by that is one of the many reasons washington is very out of touch with the rest of the country is that they kind of groupthink. that leads to major misconceptions about what is , they going on with thenal wisdom rack. the new york times had a hand in perpetrating that. and, no, the american people are
not ready for an african- american president. 2016. health care. there was a time in politico where there was coverage everywhere about health care. to have have been nice a maybe more technical debate, which, of course, is the big story now. not think politico alone drives that in any sense. of politico model is to be the espn for politics. think it true, and i is the business, the franchise, but in one way, espn has elevated the personality of sports,the coverage of
and also the notion that this is not sports, this is real life. >> what is the most important thing that you have learned since this came out? traveling the country doing talk wish heomething he would have included or reflected on? what one thing, and that is a , reflecting on something that kelly and jake paragraph about the distinction between this is inwhich people think washington, d.c., because it is in washington, d.c., that the citizens are very rarefied and cultured. , and theexposure
citizens of this town do not represent the millions of people , including the men and women who lost their lives at the naval yard recently. retrospect, was there anyone you were too hard on in this? but you had your chance. like, if you had a do over, you would not quite say it that way. i do. i second-guess myself. my editors. certainly, there are things to do differently. i probably would have been harder on some people. >> who were you too easy on?
without naming a name, what category of person? ont person were you too easy that in retrospect he realized that? >> i think the ilk is pretty well covered. it is pretty equal opportunity. >> the 10 best books of 2013. days of fire. how did it start out? what was the amazing chronicle? >> it started in 2006. over, i was struck by the bush white house in the second term. he was at a high and had won an
election without a recount, and he felt expansive in his ambition for the country and the world. there was this extraordinary of this spreading around the world, and then the was to building your years a breakfast of misery for any president, and this was so ihing we had not seen, had initially thought of doing a book on the second term. i was covering the bush white house at the time. contract at the end of 2006, and the book changed over time. ultimately, after the administration was over, we expanded the scope. first, history of that
and it wasion, suggested to me as using bush and cheney as the ark, talking about their involving relationship. mostter, what is the interesting thing you have learned or been told since the book was published that you wish was in it? >> somebody tells me almost every day something. and i am, why did you not tell me this? i am not going to give away too much. there were different little moments that people told me about. some people said, it was even more so. doing books, and this is the day,, what you do every
the new york times or cnn or nbc, they say, we are not debating this, or so-and-so is not in trouble, or this is really not happening. it is almost always happening. and it is almost always happening far more than they imagine. >> all right, we are going to do a rapid round of one-word answer, and then we can discuss this. difficult to cover the bush administration or the obama administration. >> one-word? >> bush or obama? >> bush. >> you get to expand, right? >> president obama.
>> peter? >> i am going to say obama. >> there is an interesting issue that is getting some broader attention, access to the white house, and i think collectively, we have not told the story well in terms of traditional news media. i do not mean a sense of where do you get it, whether it is newsprint or digital. it is supposed to report without a lot of things being attached. this question of access, is the bete house controlling functions, meetings with world leaders, where received an official photo, and that photo is often interesting, and sometimes it appears newsworthy. taken by the white house, not a group of journalists or photographers.
picturele say it is a of why not have -- what do you expect? bad,g any president look , ifhe president is signing they are swearing in a cabinet official, if there is a world ,eader, i think those are even and they used to have more coverage. why is the obama administration going the other way? they certainly can. they can have their own photos. .hey can have white house.gov >> peter baker, the white house journalists have formalized their concerns about this to jay carney and to the association for useful discussion.
we hearense from what and read between the lines that they get it and that they are going to respond with change, or not? >> i think they get it. i think they will try to respond. the photographers are really not there to try to screw them. they just want to get good xers. some things that are tough war me the height to of silliness not to facilitate this, and they come back on the plane, those are the ones they want to talk to, the photographers. they are friendly, and they are not asking tough questions. threatening, in that sense. peter, you hear a lot behind the scenes.
a sense of how the everyoneple think? does it, every white house gets worse. i agree with her point. each white house has its own challenges. they would bring in reporters, meeting with a world leader, and it was a chance to ask a couple of questions. mr. president, there is a rise in cincinnati, or someone is up or i hear a leader in north korea has been executed. what do you think? they want to control the messages. everything, control
and they think people are distracting from the message of the day. having said that, so many events go by and we do not get to hear the president thought about it. is one.rea they just executed the uncle of the leader. that was fascinating. i was curious to hear about that, but we will probably never get a chance. also, if you are in, you see which advisers are present, and that tells you a lot. you look at an event that might be happening here, but i also look at who else. things give you a lot of the texture of the moment. many times when covering bush, it was helpful, because it gave you a feel. you just cannot have the opportunity.
obama press relations, you said they are easier than bush. >> they are not easy to cover, and what the white house communications shop has done has violation of in the president's desire for accountability and transparency. they want to control the message. he is the president of the united states. as the public, not as reporters, to hear what his thoughts are. we want to hear what his thoughts are on the subject. it is always weird to me. the bush people hated me.
they probably in a lot of cases still do. so, however difficult the obama people might be, at least 25% of the time, they return my call or e-mail. that was not the case for bush or his team. >> you have the cover story on sundays new york times magazine. post shame mccain. it is a quote on here, talking about anything is possible. tell us about that photograph. tell us something notable. >> days of fire. the new york times is really savvy. >> mccain is beyond shame, but we are not. [laughter] totally. this is that kind of thing.
>> so you can see from reading the story, you have known from covering senator mccain since 2000, what did you learn about senator mccain? contexthink just in the of carnations, he has been the product of so many phases. his life. -- what wasf striking is how friendly he is. is the kind of reflective you get when someone is deciding if you want to run. i think a lot of it was about republicans in the senate.